Did Adam make the right choice?

[Revelations won]

Did Adam make the right choice?

Did Adam make the right choice in partaking of the fruit from the tree of knowledge and should we be grateful to him and give due respect and honor our first earthly parents?

2. Did Adam’s choice prohibit anyone from receiving ALL that our Father in heaven has ever promised us pertaining to our eternal destiny?

Kind regards,
RW

[The Tanager]

Because neither "obey if in ignorance" nor "disobey if in ignorance" can be universalised. Each is terrible. Reach for more knowledge if in ignorance is, 99% of the time, the right choice. It only fails in the one case that the ruler genuinely cares about you and is also genuinely offended if you try to get more information or learn by doing.

It’s not about not reaching for more knowledge, but about discerning the right sources. To assume that Adam and Eve weren’t capable of doing that is reading disbelief into the story.

I know this is likely to derail the topic, but do you think the person who draws Mohamed deserves death? If not, you too are listening to someone who says yes over someone who says no, and for not too much reason except that the yes makes life easier and gives someone their desire. The no would mean our laws are wrong and we need to change them, and we need to rework our ideas about freedom and change ourselves, and that would be uncomfortable.

I’m unclear on what you mean about “listening to someone who says yes over someone who says no”. Could you rephrase your point there?

We're wiser because we are sitting here reading the story. We know more about being deceived because we live in a world where that happens every day.

Yet we still fall for it all the time. That’s being wiser?

I just wonder, I think rightly, why, if they were such greedy pigs, apt to do whatever they felt like heedless of the consequences, they didn't just eat the fruit the second God's back was turned, and they needed someone to convince them to do it.

What shows or who said they were greedy pigs, doing whatever they want without heeding the consequences? They had God’s wisdom, they heard the serpent’s view, and they thought about it, eventually making a decision.

[Purple Knight]

It’s not about not reaching for more knowledge, but about discerning the right sources. To assume that Adam and Eve weren’t capable of doing that is reading disbelief into the story.

If they thought God was the right source and they would die, they were lemmings, not just fools. It's reasonable to say they didn't know what would happen for certain. In that case, the best option is to try to learn what will happen. If that comes by way of doing it, I don't see the problem as human beings all do it.

I’m unclear on what you mean about “listening to someone who says yes over someone who says no”. Could you rephrase your point there?

You're listening to someone who says yes, you can do something (in this case, draw Mohammed) over those who say no, you cannot do that thing, it is evil. Maybe you're not, but I find most people overly dismissive of the idea that it is really sacrilege. What if it is?

We're wiser because we are sitting here reading the story. We know more about being deceived because we live in a world where that happens every day.

Yet we still fall for it all the time. That’s being wiser?

If we don't fall for it every time, we're wiser than someone who does.

I just wonder, I think rightly, why, if they were such greedy pigs, apt to do whatever they felt like heedless of the consequences, they didn't just eat the fruit the second God's back was turned, and they needed someone to convince them to do it.

What shows or who said they were greedy pigs, doing whatever they want without heeding the consequences? They had God’s wisdom, they heard the serpent’s view, and they thought about it, eventually making a decision.

You likened their choice to impulsivity - doing something that feels good in the moment even when it is known that it isn't wise. It's a valid point that if it came down to their own impulses, they would have just done it without the serpent encouraging them to.

[Revelations won]

Dear Tanager,

My explanation of my point #3:

3. Adam and Eve dwelt in the Garden of Eden for a unspecified period which could have been hundreds or thousands of years.

When we examine the book of Genesis it is so noted that in just a few pages we cover monumental events which may span thousands of years in reference to the creative process. The details of all this process are so extremely condensed that God has not revealed in the account many things pertaining thereto.

For example “Adam was created from the dust of the earth”. We regimen no details of how and in what manner this was accomplished. It is so noted that there are many who by “private interpretations” give their many “man made” theories and doctrines relating thereto.

For example, do we take the creation of Adam and Eve as “literal” or as “figurative” as far as their creation details are concerned?

Our physical bodies of flesh and bone are also created “from the dust of the earth” and upon death are returned or decay back to dust as the scriptures attest.

The book of Genesis is extremely lacking on the exact details of how or where or when this process was accomplished.

There is no account given of their childhood on this earth or any other earth. It would certainly be wonderful if we had the full details.

Let us examine Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

We can gain a flood of things from this powerful verse:

First: “And God said, Let us make man in our image” we observe Gods in the plural. There is also a second witness given in Genesis 3:22.

Second: Adam was given “dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” This is a very spectacular authority or power to have dominion over all other living creatures.

What was this priesthood power or authority that was given to Adam for their protection in the garden and after his expulsion from the garden?

The Lord placed the man and his wife into the garden. Where were they before they were placed into the garden of eden?

Did Adam and Eve have a father and a mother? Observe Genesis 2:24.

Who married them?

When and where did all this marriage occur?

Who was present at this marriage?

Since they were not subject to death, then it is abundantly clear that this marriage was for eternity.

Why and by whom was this original eternal marriage covenant authoritiativly changed?

Why is this doctrine missing in almost all churches today?

Best regards,
RW

[AgnosticBoy]

Did Adam make the right choice?

Did Adam make the right choice in partaking of the fruit from the tree of knowledge and should we be grateful to him and give due respect and honor our first earthly parents?

2. Did Adam’s choice prohibit anyone from receiving ALL that our Father in heaven has ever promised us pertaining to our eternal destiny?

Kind regards,
RW

The sin of Adam and Eve was not having knowledge, but rather it was their disobedience. They were given orders, and they did not follow them.

It doesn't matter how good it would've been to have knowledge. Apparently, following God's orders trumps that.

[Revelations won]

Dear Tanager,

The Fall of Adam

When we discuss the “Fall of Adam”, we need to view this from the perspective of “The Three Pillars of eternity”.

In other words the three greatest events that have ever occurred or ever will occur. In all eternity are these:

1. The creation of the heavens and the earth, of man and all forms of life;

2. The fall of man , of all forms of life, and the earth itself from their primeval and paradisiacal stater to their present mortal state; and

3. The infinite and eternal atonement, which ransoms man, all living things, and the earth also from their fallen state so that the salvation of the earth and all living things may be completed.

These three divine events-the three pillars of eternity- are inseparably woven together into one great tapestry known as the eternal plan of salvation. We view the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ as the center and core and heart of revealed religion. It brings to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Salvation is in Christ.

Kind regards,
RW

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #70]

Do you think it is not important to understand that if the God had wanted humans to rely on God, that God would have made humans to know this? Perhaps through being a visible entity which in the world of humans, whom humans would know was the reliable source to go to and get their advice from?

Do you think being a visible entity is the only way God could have made humans to know this?

What other ways have been shown to the world that relying on a concept of a God is better than an actual God being visible?

Have you questioned the one being obeyed?

What do you mean? Have I questioned God on whether Genesis speaks of blind obedience? If not, then what are you asking me?

I am asking you whether you have questioned the concepts of the God that you believe in.

Unless one can see the God, how is one not blind in one's obedience to said God?
One is worshiping a concept and bestowing upon that concept an image of benevolence.
How is that any different to bestowing upon a Devil, malevolence?

Why is eyesight the only way to see God?

Why should concepts which have created images in peoples minds and not shown to be true, be regarded as reliable ways to "see God"?

How has this imagined God shown itself to being trustworthy? The stories relied upon as way of answer, are questionable.

We are talking about Adam and Eve. So whether people now are only relying on stories, they weren’t relying on stories.

Untrue!

Clearly Adam relied on the story the God told him, was true. Doubt came into the story line after that.

Clearly the God wasn't always present, and clearly the God put the forbidden fruit tree in the Garden and also the Serpent.

Indeed - it is the stories and the conflicting nature of said stories which confused Adam rather than helped Adam form reliable trustworthy information in which to make decision.

Death. Pain. Orphaned. Banished. Ravaged by the nature of the created thing. What image do those who bring said image to us, should we expect to see of a God-concept which calls upon "evil" and calls it "good"?

These are the questions which have always been asked and never being answered sufficiently for said image to be beheld as a true one, re an invisible entity called "God".

Are you saying they have never been objectively answered sufficiently?

I have seen no such evidence. If you think such evidence exists, provide it.

[The Tanager]

If they thought God was the right source and they would die, they were lemmings, not just fools. It's reasonable to say they didn't know what would happen for certain. In that case, the best option is to try to learn what will happen. If that comes by way of doing it, I don't see the problem as human beings all do it.

Yes, it’s reasonable to say they didn’t know with certainty. In that uncertainty, they decided to follow their wishful thinking, in spite of knowing they are limited in their knowledge of things and God has never failed them, rather than God’s advice. They devalued their relationship with God and overvalued perceived control and pleasure. I don’t see how that is a better choice.

You're listening to someone who says yes, you can do something (in this case, draw Mohammed) over those who say no, you cannot do that thing, it is evil. Maybe you're not, but I find most people overly dismissive of the idea that it is really sacrilege. What if it is?

I’m still confused about your point in saying this. Are you saying we are all just listening to other humans, whatever we choose? Are you saying I believe it’s not a sacrilege just because I’m a Christian, without giving it further thought? Something else?

If we don't fall for it every time, we're wiser than someone who does.

And you think the Genesis story is making a claim that Adam and Eve fell for it (or would have fallen for) every single attempt they faced?

You likened their choice to impulsivity - doing something that feels good in the moment even when it is known that it isn't wise. It's a valid point that if it came down to their own impulses, they would have just done it without the serpent encouraging them to.

I’m not sure I see as clear cut a separation between our rationality and emotionality as you might. I think we often use our intellect to try to justify our emotional desires. This is true whether we are spurned into such thinking via someone else’s words or our own thoughts.

[The Tanager]

Dear Tanager,

My explanation of my point #3:

3. Adam and Eve dwelt in the Garden of Eden for a unspecified period which could have been hundreds or thousands of years.

…

Your argument that follows for #3 seems to be that:

(1) there are multiple gods
(2) Adam had spectacular authority over other living creatures

And then you go into a series of questions about Adam and Eve’s location before being in the garden, their parents, when they were married and who was there, who changed their marriage covenant, and why this is missing in churches.

I don’t see how any of that supports #3. Although, I’m not necessarily disagreeing with #3. Yes, we are not told how long they dwelt there before the Fall story.

I don’t think you gave me your reasoning for point #2, which I’m more interested in. Why do you believe Adam and Eve (and us?) were spirit children in heaven that then were given physical bodies of flesh and bone on the earth? Perhaps that will connect with what you’ve said here about Adam and Eve, their parents, etc., but I don’t want to just assume it does.

[The Tanager]

What other ways have been shown to the world that relying on a concept of a God is better than an actual God being visible?

Why are you equating relying on an invisible God with relying on a concept of a God?

Why should concepts which have created images in peoples minds and not shown to be true, be regarded as reliable ways to "see God"?

I’m not arguing for concepts being necessarily reliable. I think logic, history, science, philosophy, personal experience, etc. are all needed to form a reliable picture. Why do you think eyesight is the only thing that is reliable? If you don’t think it is, then what did you mean when you wrote: “Unless one can see the God, how is one not blind in one’s obedience to said God?”

I am asking you whether you have questioned the concepts of the God that you believe in.

Yes, I have from before becoming a Christian and ever since. I’ve done it with you (and many others) openly on this forum many times.

We are talking about Adam and Eve. So whether people now are only relying on stories, they weren’t relying on stories.

Untrue!

Clearly Adam relied on the story the God told him, was true. Doubt came into the story line after that.

Clearly the God wasn't always present, and clearly the God put the forbidden fruit tree in the Garden and also the Serpent.

So by “relying on stories” you mean relying on something other than direct personal experience of X? Then, why do you think that Adam and Eve directly experiencing God’s trustworthiness on A and on B and on P is not enough for them to view God as trustworthy on X? Why must they also have direct experience of X before knowing whether God is probably trustworthy about X as well?

Indeed - it is the stories and the conflicting nature of said stories which confused Adam rather than helped Adam form reliable trustworthy information in which to make decision.

I’ve seen no evidence from you that the stories are of a conflicting nature. You’ve shared some thoughts and I’ve critiqued those, though, so if you’ve nothing new to add to that part of the conversation, neither do I.

Are you saying they have never been objectively answered sufficiently?

I have seen no such evidence. If you think such evidence exists, provide it.

Okay, so you aren’t saying they have objectively been insufficient, just that you disagree with the answers given? I’ve offered thoughts here and elsewhere. You’ve responded to those thoughts and I’ve responded to those. I’ve nothing new to add at the moment.

[William]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #69]

And yes, if Adam and Eve knew what would happen, they were fools and chose wrongly. I just wonder, I think rightly, why, if they were such greedy pigs, apt to do whatever they felt like heedless of the consequences, they didn't just eat the fruit the second God's back was turned, and they needed someone to convince them to do it.

I think the story itself derives from what Jung referred to as The Archetypes.
A Jungian archetype is a pattern that's universally recognized by people of different eras as a consequence of the collective unconscious. Jungian archetypes were proposed by Carl Jung as a refutation to John Locke's Tabula Rasa theory that people are born in a blank mental state.

I think that the two theories are best used together so that a more defined explanation can be drawn from those concepts.

Adam represents Human and Eve of course is necessary to that. She is presented as the Gods afterthought - after the God observes Adam alone in the Garden.
Eden represents the whole planet and what Humans can achieve when they put their collective minds to it.
The whole planet [where the God banished the pair] represents something which is wild/untamed and frightening and together, Eden represents as a pocket in the Collective Unconscious which is Human Desire for peace and simplicity, a cold beer and a "Do Not Bother" sign on the gate.

This area - within the individual - is where we all go to escape the onslaught of being Human on a planet out in the middle of nowhere.

The place within the mind, where Dragons and Gods are born.