Question on Genesis

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Peace to all of you. I came across a thought earlier in this week which I found amusing.

I didn't want to be so curious as to search for the answer, so I'll ask everyone else.

If Adam and Eve did not know of evil or sin, why were they guilty of eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge?

This is not a debate over whether the bible is right or wrong, it is only a simple question which I know that many people on ATS will be able to answer without being disrespectful.

Peace and thanks to all of you,

I ask you to pray for me, and that I may bear my crosses patiently.

Thx again!




posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by backcase
 


They were tricked by a talking Snake... so blame the devil


Gnostics seem to think the snake was actually doing them some good... opening their eyes...

Why would "God" put the tree in the garden... then tell them they can't eat from it?

Have you ever tried putting candy in front of a child... then leaving the room after telling the child he can't touch it?

edit on 2-2-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   
It's ironic that on ATS there exist people who consider that there are some things 'forbidden' and even more so that the very thing that they are told which is forbidden, is knowledge.

Yet unravelling a conspiracy is not an issue - still a power telling you to forget about the knowledge, it's forbidden.

How is it that a man made book using mad made strategy to control a largely ignorant group of people, transforms into gods reason why humans are cast out to earth as punishment, from the garden of eden?

"Touch my stuff, and you'll go to hell!" is pretty much what it says, as men in robes glorify themselves and bring hordes of people to come praise them every sunday, all in the name of god that is.. pass the plate.

Tree of knowledge can be just as easily a book or a chest. and only pirates steal chests.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by backcase
 



If Adam and Eve did not know of evil or sin, why were they guilty of eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge?


Adam and Eve did not know of sin or evil... but they were specifically instructed not to eat the fruit, and were warned of dire consequences if they did so.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Keep in mind that the same God who planted the Tree of Life in the garden, also planted the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. God's plan, carried out through the serpent, was for Adam & Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, as a means for them, and us, to learn and grow up to maturity. Don't be fooled by God's apparent surprise when He asks, "Who told you, you were naked?" Even though they had been innocent, their eyes had been opened by the act of eating, and they had an awareness they had lacked before the eating.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Well it was called the "original sin" so they had to have knowledge of this evil if they were instructed not to do so.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by backcase
 


Sin is nothing but disobedience. Adam and Eve had the free will to disobey, the devil just gave the necessary push to tilt the balance towards it.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


Exactly, disobedience is a sin. The "original sin" was a sin because they knew it was wrong to do. A sin is when we do what we know is wrong.

So, didn't Adam and Eve already have knowledge of good and evil? They had knowledge of sin before eating from the tree, right? otherwise eating the fruit would not have been a sin.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


But they were conscious of the sin, before eating the "Fruit", so they already had knowledge of good and evil, did they not?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by backcase
 

To me, the key to it all is understanding the phrase "knowing good and evil".
I think this is a Hebraism for "telling the difference between them, deciding which is which".
In other words, this is all about making your own choices about what is right and wrong, independent of God.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by backcase
 

To me, the key to it all is understanding the phrase "knowing good and evil".
I think this is a Hebraism for "telling the difference between them, deciding which is which".
In other words, this is all about making your own choices about what is right and wrong, independent of God.



I understand what you are trying to say.

but after being instructed not to eat of the tree from God, they do so, thus they disobey God which means they sinned, and they knew it was a sin.

So didn't they already have a vague perception of knowing "which is which"?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by backcase
 

Previously they had God telling them which was which.
The offer being made by the serpent was that they would "become like God" in the sense of choosing for themselves. So they did.
The original objection is based on an understanding of "knowing evil" suggested by the English translation. The Bible is not intending to say that they "did not know what evil was", so that objection disappears.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by backcase
reply to post by logical7
 


Exactly, disobedience is a sin. The "original sin" was a sin because they knew it was wrong to do. A sin is when we do what we know is wrong.

So, didn't Adam and Eve already have knowledge of good and evil? They had knowledge of sin before eating from the tree, right? otherwise eating the fruit would not have been a sin.

very true, but then the islamic idea doesnt consider that tree as "tree of knowledge."
On the other hand Qur'an says that God Himself taught Adam the 'name of all things', i.e. Knowledge and that made Adam superior to even angels as angels only had limited knowledge(according to their job) but Adam(Man) got the potential to get as much knowledge as needed.
You also have pointed the exact idea of what sin is.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   
"Original sin" was first attached to Christianity centuries after Jesus lived. www.gospeltruth.net...
First by Augustine,

This is the incredible dogma that is unblushingly taught by those who hold to the doctrine of original sin. (Note: see the end of this chapter for direct quotes from advocates of original sin.)

Up to this point we have spoken of the theory of original sin without distinguishing between the differing theories. But now, let us look at the historical origin of each of the three main theories, along with their distinctive features, as outlined below:

1.The Augustinian Theory. This is also called the Theory of Adam's Natural Headship and the Realistic Theory. This theory was formulated by Augustine in the fifth century A.D. The Augustinian Theory affirms that, by virtue of organic unity, the whole human race existed in Adam at the time of his transgression. It says that Adam's will was the will of the species, so that in Adam's free act, the will of the race revolted against God, and the nature of the race corrupted itself. All men existed as one moral person in Adam, so that in Adam's sin we sinned, we corrupted ourselves, and we brought guilt and merited condemnation upon ourselves.

2. The Federal Theory. This theory is also called the Theory of Condemnation by Covenant and the Immediate Imputation Theory. It had its origin with Cocceius in the 17th century A.D. According to this theory, God made a covenant with Adam, agreeing to bestow upon all his descendants eternal life for his obedience, but making the penalty for his disobedience to be the condemnation of all his descendants. Since our legal representative or federal head did sin, God imputes his sin, guilt, and condemnation to all his descendants. It was thought that this theory was necessary because of the problem in the Augustinian Theory of accounting for the non-imputation of the subsequent sins of Adam and less remote ancestors for if real existence in Adam explained our responsibility for his first sin, why should not real existence in Adam and in subsequent ancestors make us guilty for those sins, too?

3. The Theory of Mediate Imputation. This theory is also called the Theory of Condemnation for Depravity. This is the theory formulated by Placeus in the 17th century A.D. Placeus originally denied that Adam's sin was in any way imputed to his posterity. But when his first view was condemned by the Synod of the French Reformed Church in 1644, he published this later view. According to this view, all men are born with a depraved nature and are guilty and condemnable for that nature. They are not viewed as being guilty because of the sin of Adam, as in the Federal Theory. Instead it is the corrupted nature which they inherit from Adam that is sufficient cause and legal ground for God to condemn them.

It is probably shocking for the Christian who has been taught these theories as Bible truths to be told that not one word of any of them can be found in the Bible.

Christians believe these theories to be Bible doctrines because theologians, preachers, and Sunday school teachers teach them as if they were Bible doctrines quoted directly from the Bible, and give them a semblance of credence with Bible texts quoted out of context.
However, these theories are not Bible doctrines.


This site is devoted to denying ignorance. While I understand, OP, that you stated in the opener that you didn't want to discuss whether or not the Bible was true, the FACT IS THAT this notion of "original sin" is NOT IN THE BIBLE ANYWHERE.....

so, the Bible is irrelevant to the discussion. What you are discussing is a fable, a myth, a story. So, what use is there in discussing it as though it were a "real event"?

You won't find a common answer, either, because too many people have "decided" which version of this STORY suits their ability to understand. Some contend that if a person is simply not of the temperament, training and education to study the DEEPER meanings - which are literally not "speakable" - they won't get it. Ever. God isn't a person;

I'm acutely interested in the concept of Original Sin being debunked, and I'm NOT meaning to flame you, but the better question is:
WHO CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA, and WHY?

The First was Augustine, and he was influenced by the fall of Rome....he saw carnal pleasure as being the most "distracting" thing from a proper contemplation of God; and his brutal invented version of God is, very sadly, the one that most Western Christians who do not study history and philosophy "believe in."

One must go far back....MUCH earlier than Jesus, to understand how the concepts of a "personal God" were developed, and why they have been misunderstandings of a deeper and INEXPLICABLE One Truth. God cannot be spoken of, truly, and there are few people who bother to try to wrap their minds around that.
edit on 3-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-2-2013 by wildtimes because: ack. mistyped. I meant I'm NOT meaning to flame the OP. NOT meaning to flame.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


"Original sin" has already been denied in Qur'an. Yes it was invented to make place for the "saviour" dying for sins. The whole 'story' has been corrected in Qur'an and i guess you can find it makes more sense than the Bible one.
Here..
Surah 7

10 It is we who have placed you with authority on earth, and in it provided
you with means for the fulfilment of
your life: small are the thanks that you
give.
11 It is we who created you and gave you chap; than we bade the angels
bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis; he refused to be of
those who bow down. 12 Allah said: What prevented you from bowing down when I
commanded you? He said: I am better
than he: you created me from fire, and
him from clay.
13 Allah said: Get down from here: it is not for you to be arrogant here: get
out, for you are of the lowest of
creatures.
14 He said: Give me respite until the day they are raised up.
15 Allah said: Be among those who have respite.
16 He said: Because you have thrown me out of the way, I will lie in wait for
them on your straight way:
17 Then will I assault them from in front and behind them, from their
right and their left. Nor will you find,
in most of them, gratitude.
18 Allah said: "Get out from this, disgraced and expelled. If any of
them follow you, hell will I fill with
you all.
19 O Adam! Dwell in the garden, you and your wife, and enjoy as you wish:
but approach not this tree or you run
into harm and transgression.
20 Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, in order to
reveal to them their shame that was
hidden from them: he said: "Your Lord
only forbade you this tree, lest you
should become angels or such beings
as live forever." 21 And he swore to them both that he was their sincere adviser.
22 So by deceit he brought about their fall: when they tasted of the tree,
their shame became manifest to them,
and they began to sew together the
leaves of the garden over their
bodies. And their Lord called to them:
"Did I not forbid you that tree, and tell you that Satan was an avowed enemy
to you?" 23 They said: "Our Lord! We have wronged our own souls: if you
forgive us not and bestow not upon
us your mercy, we shall certainly be
lost."
24 Allah said: "Get down, with enmity between you. On earth will be your dwelling place and your means of
livelihood -- for a time."
25 He said: "In it shall you live, and in it shall you die; but from it shall you
be taken out."
26 O children of Adam! We shall have bestowed raiment upon you to cover
your shame, as well as to be an
adornment to you. But the raiment of
righteousness -- that is the best. Such
are among the signs of Allah, that
they may receive admonition! 27 O children of Adam! Let not Satan seduce you, in the same manner as he
got your parents out of the garden,
stripping them of their raiment, to
expose their shame: for he and his
tribe watch you from a position
where you cannot see them. We made the demons friends to those without
faith.
28 When they do anything that is shameful, they say: "We found our
fathers doing so"; and "Allah
commanded us thus;" say: "No, Allah
never commands what is shameful:
do you say of Allah what you know
not?" 29 Say: "My Lord has commanded justice; and that you set your whole
selves at every time and place of
prayer, and call upon him, making
your devotion sincere as in his sight:
Such as he created you in the
beginning, so shall you return." 30 Some he has guided: others have deserved the loss of their way; in that
they took the demons, in preference
to Allah, for their friends and
protectors, and think that they receive
guidance. 31 O children of Adam! Wear your beautiful apparel at every time and
place of prayer: eat and drink: but
waste not the excess, for Allah loves
not the wasters.
32 Say: Who has forbidden the beautiful gifts of Allah, which he has
produced for his servants, and the
things, clean and pure, for
sustenance? Say they are, in the life of
this world, for those who believe,
purely for them on the day of judgment. Thus do we explain the
signs in detail for those who
understand.
33 Say: The things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are: shameful
deeds, whether open or secret; since
and trespasses against truth or
reason; assigning of partners to Allah,
for which he has given no authority;
and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.
34 To every people is a term appointed: when their term is
reached, not an hour can they cause
delay, nor can they advance.
35 O children of Adam! Whenever there come to you messengers from
among you, rehearsing my signs to
you -- those who are righteous and
mend their lives -- on them shall be
no fear nor shall they grieve.
36 But those who reject our signs and treat them with arrogance, they are
companions of the fire, to dwell in it
forever.
37 Who is more unjust than one who invents a lie against Allah or rejects
his signs? For such, their portion
appointed must reach them from Al-
Kitab, until when our messengers
(angels) arrive and take their souls, they say:
"Where are the things that you used to invoke besides Allah?" They will
reply, "They have left us in the lurch,"
and they will bear witness against
themselves, that they had rejected
Allah.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Have you ever tried putting candy in front of a child... then leaving the room after telling the child he can't touch it?

There ya' go.

Besides, it's all just a Summerian creation myth that has been regurgitated and rewritten.
(much like Noahs Ark .. Summerian myth regurgitated and rewritten .. )

ETA -

Originally posted by logical7
The whole 'story' has been corrected in Qur'an ...

Oh don't get me started on supposed accuracy and the Qur'an ...
edit on 2/3/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 





Oh don't get me started on supposed accuracy and the Qur'an ...

not here, make a thread, i'l be waiting, lets discuss if you feel upto it.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by backcase
 



If Adam and Eve did not know of evil or sin, why were they guilty of eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge?


Adam and Eve did not know of sin or evil... but they were specifically instructed not to eat the fruit, and were warned of dire consequences if they did so.


A sinister mother (god) places a fresh, warm batch of cookies in her 4-yr-old's playroom. The mother says, "You can play with everything in this room, but you will be punished if you eat any of these cookies."

Seeing this, the evil father (Satan) places a two-way radio in the playroom and then hides in the bathroom. The father says into the other two-way radio, "Pssss, my son, I'm telling you that you will not be punished for eating the cookies. Go ahead, eat them."

Mother catches her son eating them. While the son is being punished, she and the father laugh and laugh and laugh. "Do you think we're evil parents?" asks the mother.

"Nah," replies the father, "We're just re-enacting the Garden of Eden story in the bible. How can god be evil?"



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by backcase
Peace to all of you. I came across a thought earlier in this week which I found amusing.

I didn't want to be so curious as to search for the answer, so I'll ask everyone else.

If Adam and Eve did not know of evil or sin, why were they guilty of eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge?

This is not a debate over whether the bible is right or wrong, it is only a simple question which I know that many people on ATS will be able to answer without being disrespectful.

Peace and thanks to all of you,

I ask you to pray for me, and that I may bear my crosses patiently.

Thx again!


Honestly, I think Adam and Eve were in a situation designed for them to disobey. I think God was proving a point that mankind would disobey just as Heaven disobeyed when Satan lead his rebellion. Now that mankind had chosen to make that decision while on earth, that has set the precedent for others to follow while others come to Earth.

In my opinion, Earth is like a refining course so that when you are on Earth, you experience the beauties of life and the temptations that Satan fell to while in Heaven so that when you reach Heaven, you are fully equipped to know the difference between good and bad and make a uniform decision.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Good answer





top topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join



 
$('#skin').click(function(){ window.location.href = "http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1008463/pg1"; });