RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Bible



Message

Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/23/2008 12:12:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beth67

Why did God create the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? If he already knew that Eve and Adam would eat of it, why even make it an option?


I don't think that the tree was there so that God could test us. It was there so we would test ourselves. Will we obey the word of God, eg. 'Don't do this/that or it will lead to death'...or would we have to go through the school of hard knocks/judgments?

GEN 3:5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

I know this was the devil's temptation, but isn't it the goal of a true disciple to become 'like God'. And doesn't that happen as we are conformed into the image of Christ who is God? Please hear me, I'm not saying we are to 'become God', but to become 'like God' (in character, fruit, authority ect.).

HEB 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Were Adam and Eve of "full age" in the infancy of creation? I don't believe they were. Until you have been tempted and overcome, you have not reached maturity. But, didn't Adam and Eve learn a lesson from the tree of knowledge by "reason of use"? And here is an even more startling thought: Didn't they become more "like God" afterwards even in their failure? The following scripture seems to indicate a yes.

GEN 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

When God created man, He did so out of His plurality (elohim); 'Let US create man in OUR image'. After sinning, man came to a knowledge of good and evil "like God" (in "one" of His pluralities). Scripture even says "man has become as one of us" (Gen 3:22). But man did so by aquiring that knowledge by participating in the 'death' associated with that tree "by reason of use", and by disobedience. He didn't do it by choosing to simply obey 'the word/command of God'.

Truth is truth, no matter what the source. But if we come to a knowledge of truth, through disobedience...then I personally believe that we cannot access the 'tree of life' as it pertains to 'that' particular area of our life. And we will experience a 'death' of sorts. Maybe it will be the death of a marriage, or our finances, or a relationship ect. But I believe God is faithful to allow us to be tried/tested in that area again sometime...so that we can 'overcome' and be truly "free".

DR



BerianAardvark -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/23/2008 1:11:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DougHorton

The intent behind my comment was only to show that the definition used for free will was illogical. Whatever definition used must be consistent before and after the Fall, and consistent for believers and unbelievers.

The Fall did not change how free will functions. It only narrowed the parameters. Regeneration does not change how free will functions. It only broadens the parameters.

I think we are straying from the topic.


True, this isn't a free will thread no matter how much free will may be involved at some levels.

I do like your final statement
quote:

The Fall did not change how free will functions. It only narrowed the parameters. Regeneration does not change how free will functions. It only broadens the parameters.


I think that we are not at all far apart on our beliefs.

Tim



DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/23/2008 6:26:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark

I think that we are not at all far apart on our beliefs.

Tim


Yes. Sorry for sidetracking the thread. [:)]



guessed -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/28/2008 7:02:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ta_mosquito

quote:

When God found out what they did. He was upset and cursed the serpent, Eve, and then Adam.

All of this seems to emphasis that this was not a closely watched game. It clearly seems to say that God was not expecting any of this.


How do you reconcile this with God's sovereignty and omniscience?


You can't. If the deity is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent it follows that the deity would have known in advance what would happen.

As a mere human I cannot understand how such a being would have ever created anything in the first place. After all no human designer deliberately and knowingly creates a flawed product so why should a Being that has apparently existed outside and beyond time and space and is all powerful, all knowing and all present do so and indeed continue to do so?

The whole idea appears nonsensical to me.



DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/28/2008 7:22:21 PM)

quote:

After all no human designer deliberately and knowingly creates a flawed product


  • First, that is not true. Many manufacturers produce flawed products. Why do you think they offer limited warranties? What happened to "lifetime guarantees"? As long as the flaw rate falls within an acceptable range, they are happy.

    I remember during the 70s that Popular Mechanics was publishing articles about cars that would get 60 mph or better. Now we see ads that try to amaze us with cars can do better than 25 mph.

    I've heard it said that all Asian art is deliberately flawed because to think that you have created perfection is in bad taste.

  • Second, you are assuming that this was a flaw in God's plan. I assure you, if there had been a better way, he would have done it. He knew what He was doing and He did it perfectly. When He created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, He included it in the proclamation "It is good."



    • Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 12:16:24 PM)

    Doug,

    I agree with your corporate 'built in obsolesance' point. My roomate in the military (who ended up getting a direct commission as an officer because of his college degree) had been a chemical engineer for Dupont (I think) before getting drafted in '1969'. He was one of the original inventors of the polyglass fiber...remember the polyglass tire? Anyway, Dupont sold the fiber patent to Goodyear who came out with that 'famous' tire which had better milage than prior tires (50,000 if memory serves me). But, something that has always stuck in my mind, was when Dennis (my roommate) said, "It's a shame what they did to that fiber...it could have gotten a hundred thousand miles. [:(]

    quote:

    Doug
    Second, you are assuming that this was a flaw in God's plan. I assure you, if there had been a better way, he would have done it. He knew what He was doing and He did it perfectly. When He created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, He included it in the proclamation "It is good."


    Amen, concerning the 'assumption' of His plan.

    Everything was made 'good' until the 6th day...and then everything God had made was "very good". I've been told that the chapter 1 story of creation was the 'prophetic' one in which God "called all those things that are not, as though they were". It was a declaration of what He was 'going to do' from start to finish. And since He is God, it is declared as a 'finished' act when He speaks it.

    The second story of creation starting in chapter 2:4 was the actual carrying out of the 'prophetic proclamation' of chapter 1. And, chronologically speaking, we have not yet completed the first week of chapter 2, but many believe we are in the 6th day. The 7th day is that day when God will cease from all of His work. That is something that has not happpend yet according to some.

    JOH 5:17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father is working still, and I am working."

    DR



    DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 1:11:28 PM)

    quote:

    The second story of creation starting in chapter 2:4 was the actual carrying out of the 'prophetic proclamation' of chapter 1. And, chronologically speaking, we have not yet completed the first week of chapter 2, but many believe we are in the 6th day. The 7th day is that day when God will cease from all of His work. That is something that has not happened yet according to some.


    Yes, I'm familiar a bit with this. There is a Sabbath rest we have yet to enter.
    However, I don't see that this interpretation helps much because I am sure there is far more to the 2nd chapter than being descriptive that we have Heaven to look forward to. I admit I have not looked into it much, so I am a speaking out of ignorance.



    ta_mosquito -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 1:31:56 PM)

    quote:

    I remember during the 70s that Popular Mechanics was publishing articles about cars that would get 60 mph or better. Now we see ads that try to amaze us with cars can do better than 25 mph.


    I assume you mean MPG and not MPH, right?



    Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 4:27:56 PM)

    Doug,

    quote:

    I don't see that this interpretation helps much because I am sure there is far more to the 2nd chapter than being descriptive that we have Heaven to look forward to.


    I'm sorry if that's the implication I left you with. No, I don't think it's about us simply looking forward to heaven. I'm thinking more along the lines of being in the image of the stature of the fullness of Christ. I think that the failure of the tree to bring man into the "likeness" of what God intends was simply part of the process. It's always been part of plan A. Just like when 'the law' was given even though God knew man would ever totally live up to it.

    DR



    guessed -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 6:50:25 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DougHorton

    quote:

    After all no human designer deliberately and knowingly creates a flawed product


  • First, that is not true. Many manufacturers produce flawed products. Why do you think they offer limited warranties? What happened to "lifetime guarantees"? As long as the flaw rate falls within an acceptable range, they are happy.

    • So are you equating an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent deity with the capitalist notion of 'built in obsolescence'?

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DougHorton
  • Second, you are assuming that this was a flaw in God's plan. I assure you, if there had been a better way, he would have done it. He knew what He was doing and He did it perfectly. When He created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, He included it in the proclamation "It is good."


    • My whole argument is based on logic. If a Supreme Being is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent it would have foreknowledge that Adam and Eve would break its commands. In fact it would even have known long before the universe was formed that you and I would be conversing right now through this invention known as the PC and internet. It even knows exactly what each human being that has ever existed has done and will be doing for every second of every day of their lives.

    In other words if you accept the Supreme Being is all those three things (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) it knows everything, has absolute power and is everywhere at the same time. So all the misery and suffering in the world was known to it and it had the power to prevent it but it didn't. It allowed all this horror to unfold in full and certain knowledge of the anguish and agony that would be caused. Now for my part I think that such a concept of deity is too unpleasant for words on a forum like this.



    rcjones -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 8:42:04 PM)

    quote:


    Second, you are assuming that this was a flaw in God's plan. I assure you, if there had been a better way, he would have done it. He knew what He was doing and He did it perfectly. When He created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, He included it in the proclamation "It is good."


    This is the essence of wisdom... Good analysis.



    rcjones -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/29/2008 8:51:33 PM)

    quote:

    Everything was made 'good' until the 6th day...and then everything God had made was "very good". I've been told that the chapter 1 story of creation was the 'prophetic' one in which God "called all those things that are not, as though they were". It was a declaration of what He was 'going to do' from start to finish. And since He is God, it is declared as a 'finished' act when He speaks it.


    I'd like to know who told you this, if you remember. I'd like to chat with them.

    I see Chapter 1 as both literal and figurative.. In the figure, it is the Father speaking of his Son in the prophetic voice. The theme is that the son and his bride have dominion and are fruitful and multiply. When He says "it is very good" Christ is saying "It is finished" on the cross. Though there are hints of sin on the face of the deep, in the void and the darkness, the Son, who is the firmament, the light and the life, has it under control.


    Then I see chapters 2 through 6 as the details of how he made 'the man' and his bride in his image and likeness. Christ is the express image of God, and we are made like him. Together we are the 'image and likeness'.

    http://idontknownuthin.com/wiki/index.php/Dwg:Image_and_likeness_-_work_of_Christ_in_Abel.jpg for a picture to explain it a bit.

    So your friend and I are seeing things in a very similar way, albeit it a minority position.



    Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/30/2008 11:29:33 AM)

    rcjones,

    quote:

    I'd like to know who told you this, if you remember. I'd like to chat with them.


    I wish I could help you out here but there's a problem. He wrote in the 1800's. I was fortunate enough to get hold of a privately published book which reprinted all of his monthly writings. I looked at some websites which have some of his more lengthy writings but I couldn't find anything concerning this teaching on creation...sorry. [:(]

    His name was AP Adams and the monthly that he printed was called 'The Spirit of the Word'. Sorry I can't be of more help.

    DR



    rcjones -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/30/2008 5:42:10 PM)

    Well, we'll get a chance to chat later with him ;-) Thanks.



    DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/31/2008 11:14:02 AM)

    quote:


    In other words if you accept the Supreme Being is all those three things (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) it knows everything, has absolute power and is everywhere at the same time. So all the misery and suffering in the world was known to it and it had the power to prevent it but it didn't. It allowed all this horror to unfold in full and certain knowledge of the anguish and agony that would be caused.


    You are absolutely right. Do you have a problem with that?

    He also knew the horrible death we would use for Himself when he came in person. Do you have a problem with that?

    quote:

    Now for my part I think that such a concept of deity is too unpleasant for words on a forum like this.


    If there is a Q&A session on Judgment Day, you can take it up with Him.



    Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/31/2008 3:16:08 PM)

    Doug,

    quote:

    If there is a Q&A session on Judgment Day, you can take it up with Him.


    You didn't read 'guessed' closely enough. They are going to take it up with it...not "Him"!

    quote:

    In other words if you accept the Supreme Being is all those three things (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) it knows everything, has absolute power and is everywhere at the same time. So all the misery and suffering in the world was known to it and it had the power to prevent it but it didn't. It allowed all this horror to unfold in full and certain knowledge of the anguish and agony that would be caused. Now for my part I think that such a concept of deity is too unpleasant for words on a forum like this.


    A deeper question may yet lie behind this problem with "deity".

    DR



    DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/31/2008 3:29:29 PM)

    Actually, I did, and was planning on typing "It", but only remembered after I posted.

    May the Force be with you.



    Him4all -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (7/31/2008 3:59:48 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DougHorton

    Actually, I did, and was planning on typing "It", but only remembered after I posted.

    May the Force be with you.


    He is! [;)]

    DR



    guessed -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/4/2008 11:48:54 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DougHorton

    quote:


    In other words if you accept the Supreme Being is all those three things (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) it knows everything, has absolute power and is everywhere at the same time. So all the misery and suffering in the world was known to it and it had the power to prevent it but it didn't. It allowed all this horror to unfold in full and certain knowledge of the anguish and agony that would be caused.


    You are absolutely right. Do you have a problem with that?

    Yes. I put it to you that no human being with an iota of compassion would permit suffering that they, as an individual, had the power to prevent.

    Yet according to your interpretation a Being that is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent and which has the power to remove all misery from the world at a single stroke, chooses not to do so. In fact this Being, because it is omnipotent, could have created a world in which suffering never existed; but yet again, for reasons of its own choosing, decided not to do so.


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DougHorton He also knew the horrible death we would use for Himself when he came in person. Do you have a problem with that?

    Yes. According to your belief this schizoidal entity also allowed part of itself to undergo a horrendous death in full knowledge of the event. Yet, as the omnipotent originator it could have created a world where such a gesture was unnecessary [see above].

    From the interpretation that you have presented the characteristics of this Supreme Being would be recognised by psychiatry as exhibiting sado-masochistic tendencies.



    ta_mosquito -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/4/2008 11:57:59 AM)

    MODERATOR'S NOTE :: ATTENTION PLEASE

    guessed -

    Welcome to Forums!

    We do not require that you be an orthodox Christian to be a member of the site, but we do require that you respect our Terms of Service, especially TOS #15.

    You may want to read our Range of Doctrine and our Statement of Faith.

    Repeated statements against these documents and TOS 15 will result in disciplinary action against your account here.

    Thank you!

    Tricia
    Forums Moderator

    Please do not reply to this message within the forums or chat.

    Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.

    Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.



    DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/4/2008 1:00:56 PM)

    quote:

    From the interpretation that you have presented the characteristics of this Supreme Being would be recognised by psychiatry as exhibiting sado-masochistic tendencies.


    Actually, from the Bible I see a loving God who created the best possible world.

    Under other circumstances, I might be interested from which version of the DSM you developed your theology. It certainly is not in the DSM-IV. But to be frank, I'm not really interested today.

    Would you like to discuss Biblical theology instead?



    Shrommer -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/4/2008 5:29:50 PM)

    I think God was allowing us a way out from our dependence on him if we wanted to. We had the choice to walk out of the relationship, or else it never would have been love to begin with. We had the chance to leave from under His protection and wisdom, and try life with our own knowledge, trying to be like God ourselves.

    God is not selfish - He doesn't have to have His own way all the time in order to be complete. He is not willing that any should perish, yet He sees people perish against His will, and He allows people that option. To those who cry out to Him, He answers and saves.



    Shrommer -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/4/2008 5:35:28 PM)

    quote:



    I remember during the 70s that Popular Mechanics was publishing articles about cars that would get 60 mph or better. Now we see ads that try to amaze us with cars can do better than 25 mph.



    You must mean 25 mpg. 25 mph is not impressive today. Almost every car can go highway speeds. Unless you mean cars that travel on solar power.



    WhiteCloud7 -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/5/2008 3:17:01 AM)

    The tree of knowledge of good and evil was simply a perversion of the truth. There was no goodness of God in it. Like a rotton apple through and through, now become as spoiled in the heat of day. "Philosophy" apart from the understanding of God. Assumption, unrighteousness, greed...all the bad things. For men can receive nothing (no good thing) unless it be from heaven. Nothing bad comes from God, but mankind has many devices.(refusals/blasphemies)
    And God simply placed it in the garden. It was a trap for Satan. By his own currupt nature, he couldn't help himself, and misery loves company. Like an animal craves a meal.
    I don't believe that God created endless corrupt philosophy, He only placed it there.
    But the Lord already had a plan for Eve and Adam and the rest of us, before the earth was created in God's wisdom and delight. Jesus Christ our Lord in heaven. amen.



    DougHorton -> RE: Why the tree of knowledge? (8/5/2008 10:36:09 AM)

    quote:

    The tree of knowledge of good and evil was simply a perversion of the truth. There was no goodness of God in it.


    I don't know what version of the Bible that came from. My version says God saw all that he had created and declared "It is good."



    Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>



    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI