Garden of Eden & The Fruit of Knowledge

Alright I might have some time tonight and I will try to correctly answer this with all the facts and references I can...........

and I know Voltes you aren't out to bash. I am fascinated of Greek Mythology so I ask a lot of questions of it. Just because I don't believe in it and think it a bunch of hogwash does not mean my questions are rude or bashingin nature.

So don't worry about it.

Completely off the top of my head:
1) Why did God create Man? What is Man's purpose?

Man's chief end is to glorify God.
<a href="http://www.shortercatechism.com/resources/wsc/wsc_001.html" target="_blank">http://www.shortercatechism.com/resources/wsc/wsc_001.html</a>

2) What is The Garden of Eden? Does it still exist?

I believe it was a literal place and the Bible indicates that it still is. Where is it? I don't know.

3) Why did God create the Fruit of Knowledge? What is its purpose?

A test. A test that God knew man would fail.

This always has fascinated me. I mean, if you know your prized vase you just created yourself is going to break if you throw it to the floor, why test it? If you know Man is going to fail (i.e., you know the results of the test beforehand), what's the point of the test?

And when the vase shatters after you've thrown it, is that the vase's fault? Or put another way--if you write a computer program and build in a fault that can be infiltrated by a certain sequence of keystrokes (input:if "Fruit of Knowledge" Then "Fall from Grace"), and then you set the program running and input the error code, is it the computer's fault that it failed? does the computer deserve to be scrapped?

Things I think about sometimes. I prefer to think of all of Genesis and most of the rest of the old testament as epic mythological poetry, like the Greek myths.

I have always wondered why the Greek Gods are passed off as myth, are they really that far fetched compared to the "accepted" religions?

So what did he make the rest of the stuff for? Was the platypus just made for shits and giggles?

Because if God didn't give us the opportunity to succeed or fail then we would be automatons. A pretty thing on a shelf.

<strong> Except we aren't inanimate objects and god didn't throw us and no error code was entered. God created Adam and Eve with free will. They had teh capacity to choose good or evil. They chose and God knew they would choose badly. He didn't make them choose badly. You analogies fall short. And we weren't scrapped. We just face the consequences fopr those choices.

<strong> Some of it is, but a large part of it is historical in nature.

As all analogies must. However, if we were created with the capacity to fail the test, God had to build that capacity into us--he had to make us less than perfect, and since he had the capacity to make us perfect, we can assume he did it out of his own choice, since we were uncreated at that point and couldn't have chosen. He knew we would fail b/c he created us and knew that if you put a certain set of circumstances in front of us, we would choose the "wrong" one. My point is, since he had to know that (and you admit he did), and yet still put man in the circumstances in which he knew they would fail (he planted the Tree of Knowledge, not man), then why is it such a surprise that man fell from grace?

If man did have a choice, yet God knew what he would choose and put the choice in front of him anyway, how is it man's fault that he chose what God knew he would choose in the first place?

Okay, I'm rambling, but that's my point.

Oh, and by "scrapped" I mean "damned to hell forever." Sorry, I should have said.

The chief point though is that God built man and the circumstances that led to his fall, knowing all the time that that's precisely what would happen.

Which goes back to my original question: what's the point of a test that you know the outcome of already? Obviously not to "prove it" as scientists would have to do for their theories--God wouldn't need such proof, you'd think.

I don't know they dont seem to do the same stuff today that tey used to back when.

They even moved out of Olympus. Now that really hurt!

I know I can't really back this up with anything, so don't think I'm trying to make a real convincing argument. The fact is I can't remember the details, but the answer to this question came up in one of my Theology classes. My professor talked about the fruit as a test as well, but NOT one that God expected us to fail. In fact, he seemed to think that God fully expected us to pass, the end result being eternal life in the garden in community with God. What I'm getting at is, the fruit itself was not bad or even necessarily forbidden. In the order that the fruit was eaten (wisdom first) THAT'S wrong. My professor somehow explained it really well, that God's intention may have been to test Man, then when he passed, give him the fruit of Life, so that he could spend eternity in the Garden with God, and THEN feed them the fruit of wisdom, otherwise what would they talk about for eternity?

Genesis 3:22 reads "And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat and so live forever."

It could either be one or the other, Life or Wisdom, or maybe they just took something God hadn't yet offered them. Which, if you're God, is not cool.

Again, I really don't know what I'm talking about. It's just bits and pieces of an interesting lecture that I only half recall.

They did have the winged horses though, Jesus don't have no winged horses.

All this also a good example of the Lord not wanting to smite us too often. He wanted to avoid that.

The way I believe that works is, as Adam was our representative and he sinned then we can do know better. Afte all God chose Adam as our rep and no one can choose better. And they didn't make a "mistake", they made a choice with knowledge of its consequences. And that choice is anything but unforgivable. God can forgive it.

Too true

<strong> You'd have to define perfect. If you mean infallible then of course we weren't. Only God is and to make us infallible would be to make us Gods. He had to make us with the capacity to fail, free will.

<strong> He knew because he forknows everything, not because he made us "imperfect" (again not sure what you mean by that). It has nothing to do with a certain set of circumstances.

<strong> No one said it was a surprise which is why he made provision for forgiveness from the beginning.

<strong> I see your point, but I think you are operating under a misunderstanding of whta it meant for God to know that man would fall. He knew because he knows all not because our sin was there by design. God is not the author of sin. He did not put a particular choice in front of A&E but rather laid out the rules and explained the consequences. Again He does not want an Automaton.

Thanks for pointing out that icon. It's been driving me crazy.

He's not the author of sin in that he didn't eat the apple, but he knew if he put the apple there that Adam and Eve would eat it. He didn't need a test to prove that--he foreknew it the way he presumably foreknows everything. So the fact that he put the apple there KNOWING that A&E would eat it and fall into sin seems to imply that he did, in fact, WANT them to sin (or if you prefer, that it was a part of his plan). Otherwise, why put the apple there? His laying out the rules and explaining the consequences didn't change the fact that he knew what would happen--the only being in the universe, presumably, that DOES have such knowledge.

So the question I have with it is, that being the case, why does A&E's doing what God knew they would do when he put the apple in front of them make them and all humans afterward deserving of eternal damnation and torture?

BTW, thanks for keeping the level of discourse reasonable. I don't do well in shouting matches.

Oops, ignore the first lines of that post, before the quote block. I'm getting my threads confused.

Ok, here's another longshot theory that I've been toying with off and on for a year or two. It kind of messes with a lot of standard theology, but here I go.

Starting from a little ways into the story, God ran all the anmals by Adam so that he could name them. In addition, this served to isolate a suitable companion for Adam, of which none was found. This led to the creation of Eve, as she was the only suitable companion for Adam.
Backtracking, perhaps God's "plan" is still a plan, but maybe he didn't "know" exactly how everything was going to go. You know, dump out the cosmic Lego bucket and see what you end up building. All the other animals, which he called good, were test companions for Him . When he created Man, he called it "very good" because He had at last found something he could hang out with. Therefore, the platypi aren't simply a fun little beast, they are an - dare I say it - evolutionary step in God's search for "His people."

Just a thought. I hope it makes the slightest bit of sense.

We as humans are not sin free according to the Bible - so we are all in the Mud so-to-speak right? And God is only going to pick Jesus' followers to go to heaven, right?

Hypothetical situation here:

Take your self back to a time (it could even be today) when a village in Africa could have not been discovered by the rest of the world.
In California a career rapist and pedophile is on his deathbed because he finally went to jail and got pushed down a flight of stairs while a broomstick was shoved up his ass. He prays to God/Jesus to wash all of the thick-crusted mud from his body even though he claimed not to believe in God up until just now. Everybody in the room hears him and rolls their eyes in disbelief, and then he dies. God says O.K. you can come in.

In a bed on the other side of the infirmary an immigrant who's village was just discover last year and was brought here by the anthropological department of a major university. He has been convicted of numerous counts of rape and pedophilia - Two practices that were common in his village, and have been for centuries. He too has been pushed down a flight of stairs with a broomstick shoved up he ass. By his bed, another person from his village who has been convicted of the very same thing has finally learned enough English to communicate to him that what he has done is very unacceptable in this society. This man because he is a good man, now apologizes profusely to everyone in the room for what he has done. He knows of no God - no Jesus to cleanse him, but the people in the room now understand why this man has done these atrocious things and they wish that he hadn't got such a bad rap. And then he dies. What does God do with him?

God is the judge of that.

Not myself.

And if you have concern for any people that haven't heard the Lord then I suggest you go show Him to them if you are so moved by it.

I have no concern for the people who have not been shown God. I am sure that the're fine people and live at one with nature. That is all anyone/anything should ask of a human. I strive for it everyday.

No sweat!!

Knowing that they were going to do wrong doesn't make what they did less wrong. They would have failed any test as do we. I know my daughter will do wrong when I tell her not to do something. That's in her nature. When she does I will punish her. And before anyone asks, no the punishment will not be eternal damnation. But God has higher standards than me I guess.

Scott--

I guess my sticking point is that if I knew for an absolute certainty that if I gave my daughter the keys to my car that she would wreck it and get seriously injured, I wouldn't need to give her the keys and see her wreck it. If I knew for an absolute certainty (as we assume God knew), and still gave her the keys, still put her in the situation in which I knew for a fact she'd get terribly injured, whether as a result of her own poor judgement or whatever, then I would be responsible for having created that situation.

So when she wrecks it, b/c I knew she would and not only did nothing to stop it, but actually took active steps to create the situation that I knew would bring it about, that's MY fault, not hers.

But then again, it's just an interesting talking point. Even when I was going to church I didn't believe that Genesis was literal history--just epic poetry and myth. But still, the questions are valid.

Of course the fact that God took steps to see that there is redemption here is being ignored.

If we continue the analogy, I give my daughter the keys to the car knowing she will drive to fast and cause an accident, I know where the accident will occur and will have an ambulance waiting for her on that exact spot. God doesn't just leave us in the void. He provided Jesus for us. And he fortold it right there in Genesis.

We can't continually protect our children from themselves. That's not my roll as a father. My roll is to teach her what she needs to do and to help her where I can. Because I know she will hurt herself and otehrs should I lock her up for the rest of her life? She will know that I will let her make her own mistakes and she will know that I will be there for her when she does.

I don't hold God resposible for my sin or for A&E's sin. He didn't make them do it. He told them not to. They ignored His explicit instruction. It's about personal responsbility. You can't feel responsible for every mistake your child makes.

I'm not ignoring the presence of your "ambulance," I'm just wondering why it was needed when the accident could have been prevented. God created A&E in such a way that he knew they would fail his Tree of Knowledge test, and when they did, he decided to send them and all their descendents to an eternity of hellfire unless they passed ANOTHER test, which he presumably knows the outcome of as well. Why?

While we're at it, why did God need blood sacrifices? Why did God need Jesus to die before he was willing to forgive? Or back to the original question, why did he need to plant the tree there in the first place, knowing the outcome of all things as he did? Why create the world at all, since he knew how it would turn out?

God's "father" role is not the same as a human father's role, b/c human fathers don't know everything and have power over everything. Hate to quote comics, but the greater your power, the greater your responsibility.

God didn't make the choice, but he did make the situation. You can't say he's totally without responsibility there.

Oh, and Jesus didn't come along till about 4000 years later--according to some theologians, Adam and Eve and all the patriarchs had to be in hell until Jesus died and harrowed it. So for 4 millenia, they DIDN'T have an ambulance. Was that fair?

Actually I'm guessing you do ignore the presence of "my" ambulance otherwise you wouldn't have used the word "your". But I see what you mean. No easy questions here so no easy answers either. I guess we should dispense with the word "accident" as it wasn't one. God designed Adam and Eve with free will. This is not a character flaw and its removal is the only way he could have ever prevented sin from happening. He didn't want slaves and so he didn't create them. And Jesus isn't a test. You either accept Him or you don't. I guess the why here is answered by saying, would you prefer He did nothing to sinners? Should he treat those who reject Him in the same way as He treats those that accept Him? This would be fair but hardly just.

<strong> This answer probably won't satisfy you but here goes. He wants blood sacrifices because that's how He is. There is probably a better more theologically correct answer but I accept it at that level. Wheter it was a planted tree or anything else we would have failed God at some point. And for your final question, I have children knowing that they will fail and ultimately die. They are imperfect creatures but I love them. God created the world, knowing it would fall into darkness but loving his creation anyway.

<strong> It is the same in a way. He loves and wants to nurture us. He gives us direction and chastises His children when we step out of bounds. Incidentally, the people that are going to Hell aren;t His children anyway but are the children of wrath. And Christians aren't literally His children but are adopted into His family.

<strong> I can and do say that.

<strong> Jesus has always been (IMO). He didn't sacrifice Himself until ca. 35 AD. My opinion is that it was also longer than 4,000 years as I am not a young Earth Creationist. I don't believe that everyone pre-Jesus was in Hell, the fiery pit. I can't really explain where they were, it involves Sheol, Abraham's bosom and all kinds of things that are outside the scope of our current discussion. But again to your final question, was it fair? Perhaps not but was it just? Yes.

Scott--

I just want to take a minute to say I'm enjoying this conversation, mainly b/c I never get to have it. Usually it's degenerated into shouting and recriminations by now.

Jesus is a test. If you accept him you pass, if you deny him you fail. How is that not a test?

I admit to not getting that. He created mankind, ergo people are his children. It seems to me he disowns those who fail him. Unless "creations" are different from "children" in some way I'm not getting.

Well, I can't. I guess we'll just have to disagree.

I actually know the Bible fairly well, and have heard the Sheol/Abraham discussions. That works out rather nicely, I guess, unless Sheol is hell, which some think it is. Perhaps a Dante Hell with circles of varying degrees of torture?

People always juxtapose fair with just when talking about hell, since it's the only way you can explain a loving God condemning someone to an eternal torture zone. However, I take issue. You can do a lot of evil stuff in 80, 90, or even (in the patriarchs' case) hundreds of years of life. However, when you compare finite evil acts to an eternity of pain, the punishment far exceeds the crimes. It's not "just" that you suffer forever for things you did on earth--in fact, it's the opposite.

And I know the "condemned for acts vs. condemned for refusing Jesus" argument, but it still seems overkill, at least for a God who's supposed to be all-loving and good. Being good shouldn't be dependent on other people's good or evil, or at least not for people. Yet God's goodness depends on whether we're good or not.

You're right, though, we're broadening the scope a lot, and we'll never agree. Still, interesting to hear both points of view.

<strong>I just want to take a minute to say I'm enjoying this conversation, mainly b/c I never get to have it. Usually it's degenerated into shouting and recriminations by now. </strong>

Fun idn it?

<strong>Jesus is a test. If you accept him you pass, if you deny him you fail. How is that not a test?</strong>

Good point.

<strong>I admit to not getting that. He created mankind, ergo people are his children. It seems to me he disowns those who fail him. Unless "creations" are different from "children" in some way I'm not getting.</strong>

It's an important distinction to make. Mormons believe that we are literally begotten of God and a spirit mother. Mainstream Christians believe that God only has one true son, Christ. We are His creations and as such have no gurantee of the inheritance that Christ has, namely, eternal life by the father's side. It is an important distinction and one Christ Himslf made more than once. We were not disinherited and did not fall from a station we never had.

<strong>Well, I can't. I guess we'll just have to disagree.</strong>

No problem there.

<strong>I actually know the Bible fairly well, and have heard the Sheol/Abraham discussions. That works out rather nicely, I guess, unless Sheol is hell, which some think it is. Perhaps a Dante Hell with circles of varying degrees of torture? </strong>

Sheol is literally the grave. I envision it as being something akin to hos I understand Catholics view purgatory, a place of waiting only. It is neither good nor bad.

<strong>People always juxtapose fair with just when talking about hell, since it's the only way you can explain a loving God condemning someone to an eternal torture zone. However, I take issue. You can do a lot of evil stuff in 80, 90, or even (in the patriarchs' case) hundreds of years of life. However, when you compare finite evil acts to an eternity of pain, the punishment far exceeds the crimes. It's not "just" that you suffer forever for things you did on earth--in fact, it's the opposite.</strong>

Are fairness and justice the same? No. And its not the evil acts that a man commits that condemns him to Hell. If that were the case then we could work our way to Heaven. Christians sin and do "evil" things too. We are no different from unbelievers in that respect. It is the rejection of God's authority and the offer of Grace that Christ makes that is the deciding factor.

<strong>And I know the "condemned for acts vs. condemned for refusing Jesus" argument, but it still seems overkill, at least for a God who's supposed to be all-loving and good. Being good shouldn't be dependent on other people's good or evil, or at least not for people. Yet God's goodness depends on whether we're good or not.</strong>

I made that argument above before I read this part but I will leave it. It may seem like overkill to you, but you have a radically different perspective than God. And God isn't just ll loving and good. He is also Holy, Righteous and Just. I put those in caps for a reason. It may seem trite to some but He is the ultimate so its called for. God is good wether we are or not. I don't really get you last two sntences. Could you expand?

<strong>You're right, though, we're broadening the scope a lot, and we'll never agree. Still, interesting to hear both points of view.</strong>

I wouldn't say we'll never agre. I hope one day we will. You never know. I agree though I am enjoying our discussion immensely.

God (or at least Jesus) calls on his followers to be good to other people regardless of those people's actions toward them. "Love thy neighbor, do good to him that does evil to you, etc." That's what we're supposed to do. However, God is only good to you (i.e., doesn't torture you forever) if you're good to him (acceptance of Christ). If God is ALL good, then our goodness or evil should be irrelevant. But once you imply that God is perhaps NOT all good, people get testy.

It's an age-old theological problem--how can God be all good and all powerful and all-loving and still condemn souls to hell? The "justness" argument has to imply that the goodness is not total. For instance, did God create Satan to fall? After all, without Satan, there would be no choice between good and evil. Is evil in the world likewise a manifestation of the will of God?

Heavy stuff.

How is worshipping cows worse than not believing anything, if they "haven't been taught about Christ"?

Analogies are by definition not the same as the things they describe. And you seem to argue that Christ dying on the cross was kind of an analogy God was making...which point I confess I don't understand.

If we're created for God's pleasure, pure and simple, and he knew when he created us that a certain portion of us would be damned to eternal hellfire, is that then a part of his pleasure too? Or did he deliberately create things that he knew would give him displeasure or, in some trains of thought, active heartbreak and sadness? And if so, why? That's the crux of it.

Actually God does cause (allow, whatever) "good" things to happen to bad folks and "bad" things to happen to good folks. Hell is only bad in our estimation. In God's view it is justice, judgment.

But see I argue that we could have fallen without Satan. And God did not create Satan as Evil. He made the choice as did A&E. Sin (Evil) entered the world through a man not through Satan and not through God. God is totally god, totally just. Hell is not evil, it is a judgment.

But presumably Satan fell before man, since he appears in the Garden (unless the "serpent" is not Satan, but something else), and therefore evil existed before man. And if you define evil as anything that's against the will of God, and God created things that he knew would go against his will, then in a very real sense God created evil, it seems to me.

Think of it this way. I make a ball out of clay. I know from the way I made it (round, smooth, hollow) that if I put it on an inclined plain it will roll, and that if it hits the ground from a height it will break. When I put it on the roof, and it rolls off and hits the ground and breaks, it's doing what I knew it would. Even if we say I created in the ball a will to roll or not, I still knew it would "choose" to roll, and I put it there anyway. I created the breakage.

What is the service we do though? Why does prayer service God in any way? What does God need that God can't do on its own? Why send prophets to remind us of rules we already know, if we didn't listen to God why should we listen to someone speaking for him? If you know the outcome of the game from the begining, why play at all?

Well the serpent is at least an adversary. I interpret it as being Satan. But Satan is not of the world. So sin entered the world through the fall not through Satan. The most I would give you is that God created the [ii]potential[/i] for evil to happen.

If the first part of your argument were true then I would give it to you. If God created us so that we would without a doube sin then He would be resposible. But He created Adam so that he had a choice to sin or no. Now God knew from eternity past what He would do and what the result would be. Knowing is not the same as causing.

And I maintain that in order for man to fall into sin God had to create in him a predisposition toward it--an "error code." If sin wasn't more attractive to man than good, he'd have chosen good. After all, we didn't create ourselves--unless we're existentialists --so that predisposition didn't come out of nowhere. And God didn't have to put the Tree there. He chose to. How is that not cause?

But now we're arguing in circles. Lots of good rational discussion here, though. Thanks again. Best wishes.

And to you too. Excellent posts.

"Here we go around, (round, round,round)
A little Van Halen for ya wink

Satan did in fact fall before man was created.

If you look at Genesis 1:1 and then 1:2 you will notice that a period of time has passed between the two.

Some scholars believe that where it says and the earth was without "form" actually means there was no order in Hebrew. Thus Satan was sent to earth with the 1/3rd that fell to walk the face of the earth. Literally there was chaos and Satan had free reign.

Then God steps in again during 1:2 and makes the world with form. As we know it today.

Satan is the serpent. Satan introduced sin into the world because it is a perversion of what God wanted for us in our life. Satan lives to pervert everything God is.

Satan was the worship leader in heaven second only to God.

Then pride took ahold of him and he wished to become higher then God and had 1/3rd the angels join with him. Also Satan's name is Lucifer which means Bearer of Light. This is also where you get that Satan comes to man in the form of great light. He is a deceiver of man. he is not out to kill. Just to blacken your soul.

So anyways God cast him and those angels joined with him down to earth. And yes demons can take on physical manifestations. Hence my firm belief that aliens are indeed demons come into physical form to trick and trap people into believeing in higher beings in the universe come to earth.

There is pletny in this post and really it doesnt make sense but bon appetite!

Voltes,

Read Perelandra by Lewis. Deals with aliens created by God who didn't fall and live in what we would call "paradise."

Good book rec.