Adam and Eve

[Woland]

Hello everyone,

Just a few questions I've had for a while.
I would really appreciate some literalist input on this, but if "liberals" (generic sense) know what sort of theological answers various sorts of literalists would typically give to these questions, please write them down if you are able and willing.

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?
2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?
3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?
4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil", how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?
5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?
6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

Any kind of answer/speculation will do just fine for this thread.
Biblical references would be great, but are not required.

The debate (more like discussion) element of this thread will consist in the dialog which will be enabled by the various answers to these questions which I hope I will get.

I'd like this thread to remain in the TDD forum because of the discussion format I have in mind, but if a moderator believes its place is elsewhere I don't have any serious issues with its being moved.

Thank you.

-Woland

[dianaiad]

Hello everyone,

Just a few questions I've had for a while.
I would really appreciate some literalist input on this, but if "liberals" (generic sense) know what sort of theological answers various sorts of literalists would typically give to these questions, please write them down if you are able and willing.

My answers are based upon a literal reading of the story...which may or may not be my personal view.

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?

Of course, else they would not have been ABLE to choose to eat that fruit.

2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?

Not as such...how could they? However, innocence is not lack of free will.

3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?

Generally. But look at the wording of the story here: The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.�

This, to me, looks a lot more like a warning label than a commandment; certainly all the other commandments in the OT are worded slightly differently...simple commands, some with instructions for what humans should do to those who disobey. None couched quite like this one, though (except perhaps the 'honor your father and mother that thy days may be long in the land...'one).

4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil",

why assume that? I'm willing to concede that a transgression against God would be included in the definition, but that it IS the definition? I would rather think that choosing evil is a transgression against God, because it is choosing evil. There is, I think, a difference.

how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?

They didn't. All they did, according to the story, is bring mortality into the world.

5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?

According to the story? yep.

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

I'm not certain what you are asking. I know that many people claim that we don't have free will because no matter how much we "choose' to, we can't flap our arms hard enough to fly.

.........but I think that free will means that one has the real ability to choose between the logically possible options available, and there are ALWAYS options, no matter how constrained one thinks one is. Even the blindfolded and bound prisoner about to be shot has options, even if they are only who, or what, he thinks about before he dies.

The ironic thing about this whole idea of free will is that if we don't have it, we don't know we don't; we CAN'T know we don't, so we may as well go on living as if we did.

Any kind of answer/speculation will do just fine for this thread.
Biblical references would be great, but are not required.

The debate (more like discussion) element of this thread will consist in the dialog which will be enabled by the various answers to these questions which I hope I will get.

I'd like this thread to remain in the TDD forum because of the discussion format I have in mind, but if a moderator believes its place is elsewhere I don't have any serious issues with its being moved.

Thank you.

-Woland

Not sure where you are going with this one. I just took the story as literal and did a literary analysis thing on it; the story part, that is.

[Hobbes]

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?

Yes. But not full autonomy.

2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?

No.

3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?

Yes.

4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil", how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?

Transgression against God wasn't the only kind of evil possible. For example, the cunning serpent did not transgress against God's established rules - but it committed an evil act by coercing Adam and Eve to do it.

And I don't think the fall of Adam and Eve is as innocuous as picking a fruit and biting into it. Their decision to disobey God allowed sin and death to enter the world and had sweeping consequences for our entire race.

I believe in a couple of doctrines if you will, that would take entirely too long to spell out. I believe in the doctrine of Original Sin, and the Representative View of the fall which is explained here. Basically the Representative View says, since Adam and Eve were our perfect representatives in a perfect environment; if they decided to transgress against God then it follows that we all will (and we all do).

You're saying it's unfair for the millions/billions that followed to be punished for what Adam and Eve did, but every single person of the millions and billions has transgressed against the Creator so it's not like innocence is being punished.

5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?

Yes.

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

It doesn't mean full autonomy but I'll accept your interpretation.

[Wootah]

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?

Yes.

2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?

Of good yes, of evil no. I personally speculate that the realisation we confront after eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil is that we learnt about evil and realised that what we knew was good.

3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?

Yes.

4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil", how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?

We all would have done as they did. I think torment is preferred to torture if you don't object.

5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?

Yes I think so.

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

That sounds reasonable. For it means that when you act, you chose to act as you did and are responsible for that action.

[Hobbes]

So I presume all 3 of us were privately invited to respond to the OP.

I guess I'm just waiting for the trap to spring or something.

[Woland]

While I do think that the story of Adam and Eve is indeed fundamentally incompatible with the notion of a "loving God" by anything I'd (so far) be willing to call a meaningful and reasonable definition of the word "loving", I'm not just trying to spring a clever trap on you to score brownie points with my ego. I'm trying to understand how Christians reconcile these issues in their own minds.

You can plainly see, I think, where I'm going with this.

I invited you (Hobbes) and dianaiad because I enjoy discussing with you and reading about your theological perspectives. I like you guys. It may not seem like it, but yeah, I'd pretty much invite both of you for a bottle of wine and a good old discussion about everything and nothing (including Christianity).
I didn't invite Wootah, though, but I should have, and I'm glad he's here.
*Waves hand*

Thanks for participating! I appreciate it.

Now, on with the discussion.

I suppose that I could just summarize my issues with the story. I think I may have touched on these with at least some of you. I'll just comment on the replies that strike me as warranting further discussion for now and add a few questions. Short answers are all that are "needed", but please feel free to elaborate.

Not as such...how could they? However, innocence is not lack of free will.

Would you be willing to use the word "loving" to describe someone who brutally punishes people defined by "innocence" (and thus their children - isn't God powerful enough to stop something like this?) for a transgression which has meaning and repercussions far beyond what they've been told and can even understand, according to the tale?

Are children a good example in a situation like this? I often hear parent-child analogies from Christians, but I've yet to meet a parent so callously malevolent that he would horribly (because let's face it, what's worse than indiscriminate suffering and death from the point of view of a being who knows not these things) punish his child (and THEIR children) for any perceived transgression? Does this not quench your eagerness to use such analogies?

Wasn't the serpent there to deceive God's "children" because of negligence on the part of the creator? What sort of parent leaves his children unattended in a garden with a tree which can cause death and (perhaps even eternal) suffering while a cunning entity has access to them only to massively punish his children (and billions of THEIR children) when he "finds out" they've disobeyed him?

All they did, according to the story, is bring mortality into the world.

"All they did"?
And tornados, earthquakes, plagues, aids, flesh-eating bacteria...?
Aren't these a product of "original sin" according to some Christian theologies (maybe not yours, if not please clarify)?

I would rather think that choosing evil is a transgression against God, because it is choosing evil.

Was it evil to eat from the tree?
How could Adam and Eve have known such a thing?

*********

And I don't think the fall of Adam and Eve is as innocuous as picking a fruit and biting into it. Their decision to disobey God allowed sin and death to enter the world and had sweeping consequences for our entire race.

Who had control over what these consequences were?
Did God not create the tree himself?
Did God HAVE to let Adam and Eve have billions of kids who would suffer, MANY of which would (by your own admission if I'm not mistaken) be tortured not just extensively but eternally?

Where do forgiveness and love come into this?
Jesus doesn't really cut it as an explanation because he only comes into the portrait thousands of years later and can't erase all the past suffering which need not have been if there was indeed a benevolent and powerful deity. He also apparently does precious little for those who can't make themselves believe he exists as a specific deity and who will be tortured eternally under the loving watch of this benevolent god.

None of this makes the slightest bit of sense to me. Try as I might, all I can see are primitive myths repackaged and rationalized by clever modern humans who know how to convince themselves and others. You know, just like you pretty much must see other religions if you're a literalist or semi-literalist Christian (unless you think they're Satan-inspired or something).

I believe in a couple of doctrines if you will, that would take entirely too long to spell out. I believe in the doctrine of Original Sin, and the Representative View of the fall which is explained here. Basically the Representative View says, since Adam and Eve were our perfect representatives in a perfect environment; if they decided to transgress against God then it follows that we all will (and we all do).

Oh, I'm well aware of these doctrines.

I just don't understand, for starters, how someone can think that the perfect humans are broken and disobey God (and "we all would") while other supernatural creatures are presumably in Heaven and haven't had to go through all these hoops or risk being tortured eternally without this reflecting badly on the creator's benevolence and/or competence.

And...
What sort of "perfect environment" has a powerful and cunning supernatural entity trying to deceive you? Not to mention a booby-trapped tree which causes death, suffering and ultimately unspeakable amounts of "sin".
"Let me place the tree right there and leave you with the serpent. Don't touch anything or you'll die! Well, more like you'll suffer, then die, and your children will suffer - possibly eternally - and die. Bye bye, don't forget how loving I am."

I'm not trying to be flippant or anything - these stories are just so absurd to me, and the rationalization attempts from literalists even more so.

You're saying it's unfair for the millions/billions that followed to be punished for what Adam and Eve did, but every single person of the millions and billions has transgressed against the Creator so it's not like innocence is being punished.

This doesn't seem to take children's innocence into consideration.
Has a child who is born, who suffers and then dies shortly thereafter (the plight of countless human beings) transgressed against the Creator?

Furthermore... Isn't it questionable at best to punish creatures for acting as they absolutely MUST? Or will you go so far as to pretend that it's even POSSIBLE for a mere human to live a sinless life? Do you see what I mean?

You spoke of "full autonomy"... What does that entail exactly?

************

Wootah - how can you be meaningfully held responsible for choosing evil if you don't know what evil IS?

Thanks people!

-Woland

[Adstar]

Hello everyone,

Just a few questions I've had for a while.
I would really appreciate some literalist input on this, but if "liberals" (generic sense) know what sort of theological answers various sorts of literalists would typically give to these questions, please write them down if you are able and willing.

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?

Yes

2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?

No.

3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?

Yes.

4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil", how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?

Wether their act of obtaining the knowledge of Good and evil was or was not sin in itself, the fact remains that once they obtained the knowledge of Good and evil they sinned. So they where sinners the moment they obtained the knowledge of Good and evil and thus could not exist in the perfect presence of God.

As we have also inherited the knowledge of Good and evil we also are sinners. Suffering because of this is a natural outcome of it. Each person is only required to live one lifetime in this state of sin and suffering.

Eternal suffering has nothing to do with Sin because God has provided a way through faith in His will to declare people righteous through faith. So eternal suffering is now a result of a choice to reject Gods Way of salvation through the Atonement of the Messiah Jesus.

5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?

Yes. And he is still more cunning.

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

We can make a meaningful choice to love what is Good and loathe what is against the truth. Our attitude to Good and evil is ours.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[Strider324]

Hello everyone,

Just a few questions I've had for a while.
I would really appreciate some literalist input on this, but if "liberals" (generic sense) know what sort of theological answers various sorts of literalists would typically give to these questions, please write them down if you are able and willing.

1. Were Adam and Eve created with "free will"?
2. Did they initially have knowledge of good and evil?
3. Is it "evil" to disobey God?
4. Assuming that any transgression against God is (the definition of?) "evil", how is it meaningful to say that Adam and Eve transgressed against God to the point where perfect justice and love entails that billions of people must suffer - some extremely - and perhaps even be tortured eternally (or extensively), as they ate the forbidden fruit when they didn't have knowledge of good and evil in the first place?
5. Is Satan more powerful, knowledgeable and cunning than the first humans?
6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

Any kind of answer/speculation will do just fine for this thread.
Biblical references would be great, but are not required.

The debate (more like discussion) element of this thread will consist in the dialog which will be enabled by the various answers to these questions which I hope I will get.

I'd like this thread to remain in the TDD forum because of the discussion format I have in mind, but if a moderator believes its place is elsewhere I don't have any serious issues with its being moved.

Thank you.

-Woland

I believe the Trees fruit is what granted the knowledge of Good and Evil, right?

Without the knowledge of good and evil (ignoring for now the obvious question of why a good and loving god would want to keep his subjects ignorant of these fundamental things) it can only be said that Adam and Eve possessed free will in the same way a 2 year old does. Yes, a 2 year old can 'choose' to pull a dogs tail. It would be a stretch to call the child Evil, wouldn't it? The child has no concept of Good and Evil.

Same with Adam and Eve.

What if Adam chose to kill Eve, because she was yammering all day long about the fact that there wasn't enough fruit in the garden or why she can't watch Oprah? On what basis could Adam be said to be either Good or Evil, when his Creator purposefully kept that knowledge from him? God would be the only entity responsible for that murder in this case .

It cannot logically be 'evil' to disobey God PRIOR to acquiring the requisite knowledge of WHAT evil is. Talk about a set-up:

"Don't eat from that tree."

"Why not?

"Cuz I said so, ya little shit, and cuz disobeying me would be EVIL!"

"What's Evil??"

"Eat that fruit and you'll find out, moron...."

"Holy gefilte fish...."

[JohnPaul]

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

I'm not certain what you are asking. I know that many people claim that we don't have free will because no matter how much we "choose' to, we can't flap our arms hard enough to fly.

That about flapping your arms may be true enough, but that is not the technical logical objection to the doctrine of free will.

If God is omniscient, perfectly all-knowing, then he knew long before he created Adam and Eve about every detail of every action that would occur in the Garden of Eden. He knew before he created them that they would eat the Forbidden Fruit, he knew that the serpent would sneak into the Garden, he knew every word the serpent would speak, he knew every choice Adam and Eve would make, etc, etc.

Since God's knowledge of everything, including every detail of the future, is absolute and perfect, there is nothing Adam and Eve could have done to change their future, no choice they could make that God did not already know, because God had perfect knowledge of every detail of the choices they would make an eternity in advance.

Do you deny this? If so, you deny the doctrine that God is omniscient, and we can't have that, can we?

John

[Strider324]

6. What does "free will" mean? Is it correct to say that it is something like "the proposition that you can make a (somehow differently than if you're lacking it) meaningful choice between good and evil"?

I'm not certain what you are asking. I know that many people claim that we don't have free will because no matter how much we "choose' to, we can't flap our arms hard enough to fly.

That about flapping your arms may be true enough, but that is not the technical logical objection to the doctrine of free will.

If God is omniscient, perfectly all-knowing, then he knew long before he created Adam and Eve about every detail of every action that would occur in the Garden of Eden. He knew before he created them that they would eat the Forbidden Fruit, he knew that the serpent would sneak into the Garden, he knew every word the serpent would speak, he knew every choice Adam and Eve would make, etc, etc.

Since God's knowledge of everything, including every detail of the future, is absolute and perfect, there is nothing Adam and Eve could have done to change their future, no choice they could make that God did not already know, because God had perfect knowledge of every detail of the choices they would make an eternity in advance.

Do you deny this? If so, you deny the doctrine that God is omniscient, and we can't have that, can we?

John

It doesn't follow that just because an entity 'Knows' something that they necessarily 'Caused' something. The fact that I may 'know' my 4 year old will sneak a cookie before dinner does not mean I 'caused' her action.

The more salient argument against free will in this thread again is the fact that Yahweh punished his creation for making a decision that required the knowledge of good and evil PRIOR to embuing them with that knowledge.

It's akin to applying the death penalty on Monday for the crime of fishing with hand grenades but not declaring it a crime until Tuesday. I think we might rightly call 'no fair', don't you?