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

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 127 by onewithhim]

but obviously Moses was satisfied with it.

You mean the guy who talked to burning bushes? The guy who kills 3,000 people for worshipping a golden bull but not his brother (who made the bull in question) right after receiving a series of commandments among which is Thou Shalt Not Kill? That's your barometer?

You obviously do not think that either Adam or Eve had the sense within their perfect and knowledgeable brains to understand that there was certainly something shaky about a snake TALKING? And especially one saying such slanderous things against Jehovah? "Hey, did God REALLY say that crazy stuff, Eve?" Do you think that informed adults would have to be TOLD that a talking snake would be ODD? Give me a break.

I'm questioning the logical inconsistency you have created here. You assert that Adam and Eve were in full position of their mental faculties, that God had told them everything they needed to know...and yet the story you are defending does not depict them as wondering what is going on with the talking snake, does not depict them as replying back to the snake "Sorry, I can't trust you, God warned us about you"

You ask why should what happened to Adam and Eve influence their descendants? It's a very simple GENETIC issue.

Again, why does God allow this to happen? Is this to say God can't stop genetic changes from happening?

w could someone perfect and flawless be born from someone who is now going to die, with a now imperfect body?

You would not be able to measure the grin on my face after reading that.

Is there no-one else you can think of who you might want to say was perfect, flawless, born of someone who is going to and did indeed die?
Last I checked, Jehovah's Witnesses do not agree with the Roman Catholic teaching of the Immaculate Conception (that states that Mary was also without sin).
So go on, tell me...how is Jesus supposed to be perfect, flawless, without sin, since well...he was born from Mary, who was herself allotted a mortal lifespan?

[ttruscott]

OR this was all part of HIS plan to prove to Adam and Eve that their friend the serpent was a liar and deceiver

So then the punishments God heaps upon Adam and Eve's descendants are unjust.

May I remind you that I do not think their descendants had heaps of punishments upon them from Adam's sin?? Every one suffers of dies for their own sin. I contend that if you are created in GOD's image and never sin you never experience this place built to resonate to the evil chosen by people. Humans suffer because they are self made sinners.

Putting the failures of orthodoxy (because they seemed to have no other way to describe the cause for our suffering), upon me is fruitless especially in the light that I call the idea of our sin inherited from Adam one of the greatest blasphemies against GOD that is the foundation of all orthodoxy.

So you can see why I take umbrage at a continuous accusation of accepting and teaching this blasphemy as if what I write is not read for understanding but just for rebuttal.

The disciplines and punishments for each person's sins are therefore perfectly just in complete harmony with the sins they chose and has nothing to do with being punished for Adam's sin.

Also, point out where in the text of Genesis the serpent utters an untruth.

Ahh, the subtlety of his genius deviousness....

You ask for his lie because you see a hole in my thinking he is a liar without proof. But his lie is not in his words but the meaning within his words (I'm one of the few Christian theologians who denies he baldly lied to Eve) but claim he lied nevertheless...

Why would Eve who obviously wants to please the person who so clearly she takes to be her GOD just willy nilly cut HIM short? Let's start with the main truth told to deceive her into disobedience: thou shalt not die. Do Adam and Eve live still?

If we consider that their death is temporary until the resurrection, then yes and no...But why would Eve believe this deception of two parts: you will not die and you will be like GOD?

Consider: for those who like long theological arguments...
1. IF she knew she was created as an eternal spirit, she would know she would not die, that is cease to exist, right? And

2. IF she knew she was an elect member of God's church then she would also know she could not die, ie be damned with God's eternal enemies.

What she did not know about yet, being new to physicality, was that bodies could die and our time here was temporary. Therefore the snake may not be presenting himself as an alternative to God, pandering to her most evil covetousness to be like God (the orthodox position) but as a teacher from God explaining the nuances of what she already know to be true, ie she would not die.

v5: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

First is the serpent's opinion that knowledge would be obtained by an opening of the eyes which was indeed proven out by that exactly happening: V7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened but rather than opening to the sin of their eating, they opened to [the sin of] their nakedness which they had before they ate. They suddenly could SEE their nakedness - they did not suddenly become naked. And we also have the witness of scripture that nakedness is accompanied by blindness: Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: spoken to a Church of saved souls who were still deep in sin... Of course we all know that sin blinds us to true spiritual value and reality so does this play out with Eve?

No one has ever successfully explained to me how knowing the difference between good and evil is bad. In fact, such knowledge is the base of all religious maturity and perfection:
Hebrews 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

1 Kings 3:9 So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong. and

Isaiah 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

All denunciations of Eve surround her wanting to be like God, yet WE ARE TO BECOME LIKE JESUS and emulate the Christ to fulfill HIS plan for us as I John 1, Colossians 3:8-17, and 1 Peter 1:15-16, "But as he which hath called you is holy so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; because it is written, 'be ye holy; for I am holy'." suggests.

IF she thought the snake was her friend and mentor because her spiritual blindness made her unable to (always, properly) distinguish between good and evil preachers and because she greatly desired to become like the ELOHIM, the same as every believer who would like to get into Paradise, commendable and quite normal, she would follow his advice.

Her sin was in seeking to obtain this worthy goal of becoming like her GOD through the “faithful" act (believing God's promise of election and His description of their lives as eternal) that the serpent suggested to her of disregarding HIS warnings of death to show her faith in HIS promises. She obviously believed that he was trying to help her achieve this goal, but alas, to her shame, he had another goal in mind and was lying to her. Thus we can see that Eve's error was directly attributable to her spiritual blindness, that is, to the fact that she listened to him as if he were her friend and pastor, rather than looking on him as one of her worst enemies.

Now, if GOD created her spiritually blind, that is, in such a way that she would be very prone to looking on the serpent as her friend, and HE refused or neglected to warn her of satan'sss nature, that is, of the incredible danger she would be in if she listened to him, how can we say that GOD loved her or did everything without fault?

One would think that IF HE had any love in HIM, HE would have warned her about the snake, HE doing everything perfectly and she being so "blind, naive, innocent and undefiled," right?

OR IF He had warned her (as a naive innocent) to rightly discern the evil of the snake, then she could not be blind and would have sought God about the snake's message.

Of course, IF she was already defiled and blinded by her unwillingness to believe GOD's word about HIS enemies and by her friendliness towards them,

then GOD just might have put her in HIS earthly garden and allowed the serpent to beguile her into eating her way out of it, without warning her of his evil intentions, so that she would learn of the snake's true character through this nasty experience, since she was unwilling to believe HIM about HIS enemies,

so that the next time HE called for a judgement against all of HIS enemies, she for one, would be willing to believe HIM that such a judgement was absolutely necessary for a peaceful life in Eden (having found that out by her experience) and she would not be beguiled out of that judgement (peaceful life) again.

Secondly:
v6: And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one WISE, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil is the same as wisdom here.

It is wise to want to end your blindness so you can discern good and evil and to want to become like your God. But this understanding she had that the fruit was good for these things implies that she knew she was blind, unable to tell between good and evil and not like her God and that she wanted to be healed.

Which begs the question, how did she get that way, supposedly just created perfect?

But since she wanted to be cured, then GOD could not have told her that evil spirits were allowed into the garden and could beguile her if she listened, and if GOD did not tell her, nor create her this way, this only leaves us with the other way, to wit:

she knew she was blind because she had previously been able to see, and this being the case, she had to look on life on earth as being a spiritual hospital or correctional centre for her faulty vision (and whatever caused it).

In other words, the fact that she was spiritually blind means that she previously had chosen to be unfaithful (the only way one becomes blinded) and the dearth of blatant witness to any prior unfaithfulness in Eden can only mean that her faithlessness had taken place before she was given life in a body on earth, and that earthly life was created to be the means of bringing her to repentance and faithfulness (sight) again.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 131 by ttruscott]

May I remind you that I do not think their descendants had heaps of punishments upon them from Adam's sin??

In which case we are no longer discussing the text, but something you yourself have made up.

I contend that if you are created in GOD's image and never sin you never experience this place built to resonate to the evil chosen by people.

I don't know about being created in God's image (whatever that phrase means), but I do not recognise the term of sin (in the way that most governments do not recognise the government of Taiwan's claim to sovereignty over mainland China).

Putting the failures of orthodoxy (because they seemed to have no other way to describe the cause for our suffering), upon me is fruitless especially in the light that I call the idea of our sin inherited from Adam one of the greatest blasphemies against GOD that is the foundation of all orthodoxy.

I was responding to each possibility as you laid out and noticing the problems with each.
I was not putting them on you.

You ask for his lie because you see a hole in my thinking he is a liar without proof. But his lie is not in his words but the meaning within his words (I'm one of the few Christian theologians who denies he baldly lied to Eve) but claim he lied nevertheless...

I do not recognise this. Either someone lies, as in they utter an untruth, or they did not utter an untruth and are not liars.

Why would Eve who obviously wants to please the person who so clearly she takes to be her GOD just willy nilly cut HIM short? Let's start with the main truth told to deceive her into disobedience: thou shalt not die. Do Adam and Eve live still?

Evidently yes, the fruit they eat does nothing at all to shorten their lifespan (or give them one to begin with). Does their biological clock, so to speak, start ticking down or have time removed from it, after they eat the fruit but before God shows up on the scene?

If we consider that their death is temporary until the resurrection, then yes and no

I do not consider this at all. I am focused on Genesis alone.

But why would Eve believe this deception of two parts: you will not die and you will be like GOD?

...perhaps because apparently it wasn't a deception? We do have God stating (to himself? To others?) his fears as to what would happen if Adam and Eve ate from both trees.

Consider: for those who like long theological arguments...
1. IF she knew she was created as an eternal spirit, she would know she would not die, that is cease to exist, right? And

I would to say something else instead, in the interest of being more precise. She wouldn't understand what dying, a warning about it, means.
There's a similar problem in the background lore to the video game World of Warcraft. The playable race Night Elves are said to have once been immortal but in a previous game (Warcraft III) something bad happened to them and they became mortal. Yet their civilisation doesn't collapse or anything, they seem to function as a society just fine even though they now have this 'death' to worry about, that they previously didn't worry about before.

2. IF she knew she was an elect member of God's church then she would also know she could not die, ie be damned with God's eternal enemies.

I disregard this since this point is not to be found in the text. Where is there mention of a church of any kind in Genesis? Or God's enemies? Is the serpent even one of God's enemies in the text, as in Satan Prince of Darkness kind of enemy?

What she did not know about yet, being new to physicality, was that bodies could die and our time here was temporary.

So then you agree with my own reasoning then? That Adam and Eve wouldn't have understood God's warning about death?

Therefore the snake may not be presenting himself as an alternative to God, pandering to her most evil covetousness to be like God (the orthodox position) but as a teacher from God explaining the nuances of what she already know to be true, ie she would not die.

That's one valid interpretation. Especially since up until that point in the text, there is no indication that God even HAD any alternatives, or that Adam and Eve knew or thought of the concept of God having alternatives or enemies.

but rather than opening to the sin of their eating, they opened to [the sin of] their nakedness which they had before they ate. They suddenly could SEE their nakedness - they did not suddenly become naked.

Which immediately juts up against God supposedly can't be near sin. Well...he was just fine with Adam and Eve being naked. Is nakedness a sin, just point blank?
The text seems to be saying so.

Of course we all know that sin blinds us to true spiritual value and reality so does this play out with Eve?

Do you mean this 'we' to include myself? If so, no, I disagree. I do not belong in that set.

No one has ever successfully explained to me how knowing the difference between good and evil is bad. In fact, such knowledge is the base of all religious maturity and perfection:

Then God shouldn't have said not to eat the fruit. He should have been tickled pink that they did so (to borrow DI's phrasing).

All denunciations of Eve surround her wanting to be like God, yet WE ARE TO BECOME LIKE JESUS and emulate the Christ to fulfill HIS plan for us

Your claim here is countered by the text
"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 live forever.�"

If we are to become like Jesus, (sinless, immortal, etc)...then why does the text say that God is seemingly terrified of the possibility of us becoming such?

Thus we can see that Eve's error was directly attributable to her spiritual blindness, that is, to the fact that she listened to him as if he were her friend and pastor, rather than looking on him as one of her worst enemies.

So it was an honest to God (parden the pun) mistake? It wasn't a case of twirling her mustache and cackling in evil glee at her diabolical plan? Eve honestly thought and believed she was being faithful to/obeying God?
Wow...still makes God out to be a dick though, when he comes back from his stroll.

Now, if GOD created her spiritually blind, that is, in such a way that she would be very prone to looking on the serpent as her friend, and HE refused or neglected to warn her of satan'sss nature, that is, of the incredible danger she would be in if she listened to him, how can we say that GOD loved her or did everything without fault?

One would think that IF HE had any love in HIM, HE would have warned her about the snake, HE doing everything perfectly and she being so "blind, naive, innocent and undefiled," right?

Precisely the reasoning I use...

Of course, IF she was already defiled and blinded by her unwillingness to believe GOD's word about HIS enemies and by her friendliness towards them,

What word about God's enemies? In the text, the only thing that God says to Eve is
"“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.�"
(actually this was said to Adam, BEFORE Eve was created, so presumably either God repeated himself to Eve, or it was told to her by Adam).
That's it. Where do you get this notion that God had enemies and warned Adam and Eve about them?

then GOD just might have put her in HIS earthly garden and allowed the serpent to beguile her into eating her way out of it, without warning her of his evil intentions, so that she would learn of the snake's true character through this nasty experience, since she was unwilling to believe HIM about HIS enemies,

So the best way for God to get someone to believe that someone else is evil, is to allow that evil person to commit some nasty deed?
Funny that. In my own life, I came to learn that my father is a child molester. Thing is, I didn't have to suffer sexual abuse myself in order to believe the charge. My family didn't sneak him into my home and allow him to molest me.
Is that how you typically do it yourself, if Person A doesn't believe you when you say Person B is bad? You allow Person B to do something nasty to A?

so that the next time HE called for a judgement against all of HIS enemies, she for one, would be willing to believe HIM that such a judgement was absolutely necessary for a peaceful life in Eden (having found that out by her experience) and she would not be beguiled out of that judgement (peaceful life) again.

you imply here that personal experience is the best way to counter evil. Also...what do you think would have happened if the snake wasn't there? Or the trees weren't there?

Until the snake opens his mouth, Eve seemed to be gung ho about obeying God's order.

It is wise to want to end your blindness so you can discern good and evil and to want to become like your God.

Then why God's panicking at the end of Genesis 3?

she knew she was blind because she had previously been able to see, and this being the case, she had to look on life on earth as being a spiritual hospital or correctional centre for her faulty vision (and whatever caused it).

Not so. You could theoretically have someone who is born physically blind, is blind all their life (as in, their eyes do not work) and desires a thing that they are told will give them sight, with them never having had sight before.

In other words, the fact that she was spiritually blind means that she previously had chosen to be unfaithful (the only way one becomes blinded)

And yet strangely enough, the Bible of the Christian religion makes no mention of this. It's something you yourself have reasoned out.

and the dearth of blatant witness to any prior unfaithfulness in Eden can only mean that her faithlessness had taken place before she was given life in a body on earth,

You neglect the other logical possibilities.
1) There was no prior unfaithfullness, period.
2) The story simply does not make logical sense

Your reasoning does not even allow for these as possibilities. You just jump to 'prior unfaithfulness pre-life-on-Earth' and hold fast to it.

and that earthly life was created to be the means of bringing her to repentance and faithfulness (sight) again.

As I stated before, if this indeed is 'true', then your God is an idiot, since my own life stands in stark refutation. I myself was able to understand the true nature of an enemy of my family without having to undergo molestation by him.
Why couldn't the God you envision do anything like that?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 131 by ttruscott]



[center]
All of humanity being punished is a whole HEAP of punishment[/center]

May I remind you that I do not think their descendants had heaps of punishments upon them from Adam's sin??

All humans were punished for Eve's gullibility.
All of them.



[center]that's a heap o' punishment[/center]

[dio9]

the Adam and Eve story is a metaphor to explain how a totally good God could create a suffering humanity. Why are we suffering? Because...you know the story.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 134 by dio9]



[center]
It would be best not to speak for everyone[/center]

the Adam and Eve story is a metaphor to explain how a totally good God could create a suffering humanity. Why are we suffering? Because...you know the story.

Correction:

You are describing your interpretation of the story.
The story is the story.

____________

Question:

• 
  
  Are we all supposed to interpret it the same as you?
  
  

____________

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 122 by ttruscott]

My interpretation is that they were adult enough to have been given the job of gardeners and to have intellectual discussions about life and death matters. That is, they were not 'children"...

If they didn't even know right from wrong.. they were complete idiots.

[ttruscott]

the Adam and Eve story is a metaphor to explain how a totally good God could create a suffering humanity. Why are we suffering? Because...you know the story.

If the suffering is real, does a metaphor really cut it?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 137 by ttruscott]

[center]


Not all stories are real[/center]

the Adam and Eve story is a metaphor to explain how a totally good God could create a suffering humanity. Why are we suffering? Because...you know the story.

If the suffering is real, does a metaphor really cut it?

____________

Question:

• 
  
  Who says ANY of the story is real?
  
  
  

____________

[Revelations won]

As I review some of the posts and personal interpretations on this most important topic I think it well that we should observe some critical details of the account.

1. Adam was according to the account was not born as a little child which would grow to manhood. Would this indicate that he was transported from another planet to start the process of mortality on this earth?

2. Is not the same also true regarding his wife eve?

3. Although placed here on this earth as fully grown adults it is also obvious that they had all memories of their childhood and birth erased so that they indeed were as a newborn.

4. They, under that circumstance had no idea of what death or sin meant, since that had no knowledge of good and evil and the consequences thereof.

5. Some on this topic have wrongfully declared that Eve was rebellious. The scriptures do NOT support this position.

6. Some have also wrongfully declared that Adam partook of the fruit as an act of rebellion. Again, the scriptures do NOT so declare such to be the case..

7. There was no sin in the man and his wife being naked.

8. Many have falsely judged Adam and eve that their decision to partake of the fruit was a bad decision. I strongly disagree on the basis that their decision was in harmony with God's eternal plan and in full support of that plan as taught by Peter as shown in 1 Peter chapter 1.

9. If anyone thinks for a moment that they should have refused to partake of the fruit and remained in the garden, then this is a clear admission that God fully intended marriage to be of an ETERNAL NATURE.

10. Adam declared that a man should leave father and mother and cleave unto his wife. So according to this statement it is obvious that he had a father and mother. Who is his father and mother and on what planet did they dwell?

Is there anyone prepared to answer all of these 10 questions?