The point of the tree of good and evil?

So is it good for man to have knowledge of anything that is not good?

Originally posted by galveston75
So is it good for man to have knowledge of anything that is not good?

I think it is not as good as it is for man to have the living God as his indwelling eternal life.

The problem is that after the fall the man had the knowledge of good and evil. But man did NOT always have the life power to DO the good that he knows nor resist the evil that he knows.

He has the knowledge. But he did not obtain the power to do the good that he knows or resist the evil that he knows. Nevertheless man has this knowledge of good and evil and is very proud of it.

Nothing surpasses having God as the indwelling spiritual life of man. This man rejected in favor of the forbidden tree and the death which it brought.

This tree brought man into bondage to Satan, sin and death.

Originally posted by fatalinsomnia
OK, this is a serious question for all you religion scholars:

Why the hell did god put the tree in the garden of eden in the first place if he didn't want the people to eat from it (i.e., why tempt them--seems kinda strange/mean/malicious, no)?

On top of that, he made the man and woman (i.e., adam and eve) stupid so that they had really no choic ...[text shortened]... just wanna know what the bible people believe. Thanks in advance for any 'serious' answers.

It is an ancient Jewish spiritual mythology. By "mythology", I do not mean fake or untrue; although that is a common modern perception, that is not what mythology means in theological or archeological terms.

For the modern reader, the creation story and the myth of the Garden of Eden are admittedly a stretch to take literally. I get more out of Genesis by understanding it to be the spiritual awakening of the ancient Jews that it is. That is to say, it is their best explanation for their time. We may have a different explanation, but on either side of the spiritual coin it is as inadequate as the ancient explanation - which is to say we have none. We don't know how everything started. We're as in the dark as the Jews of hundreds of centuries ago.

The Jews understood the "problem" of evil; that it existed and that the nature of evil is something uniquely human. Humans have a moral choice all the time (which is represented by the tree) that all other creatures seem not to have. It is a great mystery, and how exactly does one explain it? I certainly can't, and I have nothing better than the story of the Tree of Knowledge. I'm not saying that the story is literally true, but I am saying that even though I know it's not literally true I can use it as my own personal Genesis in exploring the nature of free will that I have and that is around me. It is a lifelong exploration for those who care to travel that spiritual and philosophical path.

Originally posted by fatalinsomnia
OK, this is a serious question for all you religion scholars:

Why the hell did god put the tree in the garden of eden in the first place if he didn't want the people to eat from it (i.e., why tempt them--seems kinda strange/mean/malicious, no)?

On top of that, he made the man and woman (i.e., adam and eve) stupid so that they had really no choic just wanna know what the bible people believe. Thanks in advance for any 'serious' answers.

=====================================
On top of that, he made the man and woman (i.e., adam and eve) stupid so that they had really no choice but to give into the temptation of eating from the tree.
===================================

Adam and Eve were not stupid. He was a pristine perfection of a human being as ever there was. Adam gave names to all of the animals (Gen. 2:19,20). We should not underestimate the mental prowness and managerial ability that this required. God accepted the names. They were probably a discription of the essence of each creature.

Satan way is to run ahead of God and imitate what He wants to do. Before God incarnated as the man Jesus Christ, Satan incarnated in a serpent and was there to oppose God's purpose.

Satan first put a question in Eve's mind concerning God's word - "Did God say really say, You shall not eat of any tree in thegarden?" (Gen. 3:1). This was an attack against God's word. From an attack on God's word Satan proceeded to attack God's character. Satan accused God of lying - "You will not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil." (3:4,5)

The slander portrayed God as an arbitrary despot, a tyrant who lied in order to limit man from his greatest potential. Satan comes attacking God's word and God's motive. Satan comes disquised as a "liberator". Man was made for better things, Satan insinuates. But the despot God does not want competition. Man will not die if he disobeys God.

Let's expose the falsehoods of the Devil:

1.) If God did not want man to be like God then He would not have made man in the image of God - (Gen. 1:26 - "And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to our likeness ..."

2.) If God did not want man to fulfill his highest potential He would not have commited authority and diminion over His creation to man - (1:26 - " ... and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of heaven and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing which creeps upon the earth."

3.) Now the most dangerous lie is the lie which has a little truth in it. It was true that eating of the tree would cause their eyes to be opened to know good and evil - "And Jehovah God said, Behold man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil ..." (3:24). However, hidden in this truth was the damnable lie. They would die. The lie mixed with some amount of truth is the most dangerous kind of lie.

If you want to fight for your life and for your best blessed state:

Man must beware of the slander that causes you to doubt that God has spoken.

Man must beware of the slander that causes you to doubt God's good heart toward you, causing you to imagine that God is a arbitrary despot out to keep you unhappy and down.

Man must beware of the lie which has mixed with it some amount of the true to hook you.

Originally posted by fatalinsomnia
OK, this is a serious question for all you religion scholars:

Why the hell did god put the tree in the garden of eden in the first place if he didn't want the people to eat from it (i.e., why tempt them--seems kinda strange/mean/malicious, no)?

On top of that, he made the man and woman (i.e., adam and eve) stupid so that they had really no choic just wanna know what the bible people believe. Thanks in advance for any 'serious' answers.

===============================
For the record, I have my answer to this question--I just wanna know what the bible people believe. Thanks in advance for any 'serious' answers.
========================================

I believe that before the creation of man another being had been created who had great authority. This being rebelled and introduced into existence another will beside the will of God.

This being had dominion over God's creation on God's behalf when he was in harmony with the one will of God. When this being rebelled sin and death were introduced into existence.

God created a new creature who was not an angel but rather humble and made of the dust. And He assigned the forfeited dominion of the rebel into the hands of this new creature, the dusty man -"Let THEM have dominion ..." (my emphasis of Gen. 1:26).

God created a triangular situation with God on one side, Satan on the other side, and the new creature man in the middle. It was God's intention that man would choose between the two sides and tip the balance one way or the other.

God was represented by the tree of life. Satan was represented by "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Notice it is the knowledge not simply of evil, but of both "good and evil". Everything Satan originally had was from God. His downfall was more fundamental than him becoming evil. His downfall was his becomming independent. Even with all of his wisdom, knowledge, and authority for good, he corrupted himself because he became independent.

Man was thus in the middle of this triangle situation. And man had the free will to choose to side with God and eternal life or with "the other way".

All we really have to understand about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is that it is "the other way". It is not God's way for man. It is the other way man can choose. The other way besides the way of God is the way of sin and death.

The way of God is the way of life. The other way, not God's way, is the way of death. Regardless of how attractive it sounds - if it is the other way beside the way of God, it is death.

I further believe that if Man chose the tree of life the result would be the execution of Satan. Therefore Satan's temptation of man was a preemptive strike to save himself from execution. Man was to be the one siding with God and carrying out the execution of the already condemned former rebel.

God would not fight against the rebellious angel directly. To settle the dispute God would allow a new creature to voluntarily side with the Divine Will to crush Satan. I believe that man was created not only to be in God's image but to express God's authority over God's enemy Satan and become this enemies final executioner.

Satan's tempting of man to fall was Satan's preemptive strike to save himself from eternal damnation. I think this is how I understand the account in light of the whole rest of Scripture.

Originally posted by fatalinsomnia
OK, this is a serious question for all you religion scholars:

Why the hell did god put the tree in the garden of eden in the first place if he didn't want the people to eat from it (i.e., why tempt them--seems kinda strange/mean/malicious, no)?

On top of that, he made the man and woman (i.e., adam and eve) stupid so that they had really no choic ...[text shortened]... just wanna know what the bible people believe. Thanks in advance for any 'serious' answers.

To give you a choice. Apparently you did.

Originally posted by josephw
To give you a choice. Apparently you did.

And you didn't...?

====================================
For the modern reader, the creation story and the myth of the Garden of Eden are admittedly a stretch to take literally.
====================================

After much consideration I think that the history of man on earth is actually rooted in the supernatural. Man's beginnings included a supernatural element.

In the Old Testament certain objects were both symbolic and related to how God would deal with the Jews. For example, the ark of the covenant. It was physical yet also symbiolic and God told the Levitical priests that the care of it could not be loose or haphazard as it reflected their attitude towards God Himself.

I think something similar was going on with these two trees in the garden of Eden.


========================================
I get more out of Genesis by understanding it to be the spiritual awakening of the ancient Jews that it is. That is to say, it is their best explanation for their time. We may have a different explanation, but on either side of the spiritual coin it is as inadequate as the ancient explanation - which is to say we have none. We don't know how everything started. We're as in the dark as the Jews of hundreds of centuries ago.
============================

Yet the best way for God to convey to generations of humans His desire to indwell them is to present Himself symbolized by food - the tree of life. For food is something you must take into you. And if you eat it it becomes part of you.

This scene of man before the tree of life as a food to be taken in communicates that man must receive into his being what God has prepared for him. "You are what you eat."

This scene conveys that man is a kind of vessel meant to contain. For food is contained in the digestive system of man to nourish him and form his constitution.

The lesson here is that man's Creator is ingestable, "eatable". I do not mean physically. But spiritually God desires to impart Himself into man's being.

The Bible closes with a call for the redeemed man to eat of the tree of life and drink of the water of life. For eternity God wants to dispense His life and nature into man to become part of man's inward constitution. The Jews of that time, I am sure, also understood something of this for their prophet Jeremiah wrote "Thy words were found and I did EAT them. And thy word became the joy and rejoicing of my heart."

The spiritual among them must have taken the tree of life to mean the Torah, the word of God which they must internalize. To the New Testament saints it points to Christ Who taught "I am the bread of life".

And "As the living Father sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me shall live because of Me." (John 6:57)

Both in Old and New Testament God presents Himself to man as a Living One who must be "eaten". We are to take God into our being. We are vessels meant to take God into our being by invitation. We are enterable beings. God can live not only above us but within us, if we invite Him into us, if we "eat" Him.

Since this touches God's eternal purpose with man it was depicted in the very first chapters about man's creation.

==================================
I'm not saying that the story is literally true, but I am saying that even though I know it's not literally true I can use it as my own personal Genesis in exploring the nature of free will that I have and that is around me. It is a lifelong exploration for those who care to travel that spiritual and philosophical path.
===================================

Consider in your musings this also - To eat is to take food into us that it may be assimilated organically into our body. Hence, to eat the Son of God (John 6:47) or to eat the fruit of "the tree of life" (Gen. 2:8,9; 3:22,24; Ezek. 47:12; Rev. 2:7; 22:2,14,19; compare John 6:48; 15:1) is to receive God into us. Then we live by the Divine One Whom we have received into us to assimilate Him. In this way God can live in regenerate man, live within man, and fill out the inward being of the vessel made in the image of God as a hand fills out the glove made in its image.

It was a tree of knowledge. Good and evil are confined within the second, subordinate, prepositional phrase.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
It was a tree of knowledge. Good and evil are confined within the second, subordinate, prepositional phrase.

What is your point in saying this?

Is not the issue that they disobeyed God's command? You still have to ask why God put the tree there in the first place.(From imagination is not acceptable) Knowing man would fail.
This is a legitimate question.






Manny

Originally posted by jaywill
What is your point in saying this?

That once again you have missed the point.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
That once again you have missed the point.

I will assume that you are attempting to highlight the matter of knowledge and downplay the matter "of good and evil".

How did Adam name all the animals without using knowledge ?

The animals were named by him in 2:29,30 before his wife's formation. He did not eat of your "tree of knowledge ____" until latter in 3:6 after his wife's formation.

If God was forbidding Adam to possess knowledge period, how did Adam name the other creatures ?

Originally posted by menace71
Is not the issue that they disobeyed God's command? You still have to ask why God put the tree there in the first place.(From imagination is not acceptable) Knowing man would fail.
This is a legitimate question.






Manny

Just because Adam did make the wrong decision does not mean that if he were a different person he would have made the same mistake. You have no way of knowning that every human would have done that...

Originally posted by jaywill
I will assume that you are attempting to highlight the matter of [b]knowledge and downplay the matter "of good and evil".

How did Adam name all the animals without using knowledge ?

The animals were named by him in 2:29,30 before his wife's formation. He did not eat of your "tree of knowledge ____" until latter in ...[text shortened]... orbidding Adam to possess knowledge period, how did Adam name the other creatures ?[/b]

Moral knowledge and naming are not even in the same category. The English language fails here. In the Bible, knowing is also sex. The word is pregnant with connotations, some of which cannot abide in Eden. Observing that something is subordinate is not a call to throw it out, but it is an argument from removing it from the center.

It's a terrific myth, but you're cutting it's heart out with syncopated theology.