The "Tree" of WHAT?

by Farkel 103 Replies latest jw friends

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    The account of Adam and Eve as a literal event is so full of logical contradictions that it is mind-boggling. It only takes a minimum of scrutiny to discover that fact, too.

    There is something God did not want Adam and Eve to know. He didn’t want them to know the difference between good and evil. Why wouldn’t he want them to know that? Beats me. Furthermore, if God didn’t WANT them to know the difference between good and evil, then before they ate of that tree, they did NOT know the difference. It could be no other way.

    Without knowing the difference between good and evil, Adam and Eve would remain ethical and moral idiots without any frames of reference on how to conduct their lives. By virtue of putting that tree in the garden and by virtue of God telling them it was the tree of “knowledge” of good and evil, then it is clear they could only get that knowledge if they did eat of that tree. It could be no other way.

    They wouldn’t know that roasting their children live and eating them was evil, for example. They wouldn’t know that helping others was good, either. They simply wouldn’t know.

    What if one argues that Adam and Eve were made in God’s image as the Bible clearly states? Since God knows what is good and what is evil, then God must have given them the ability to recognize good from evil. If that were the case, then there would be no NEED for that stupid ol’ tree in the first place! They would already have the godly qualities of knowledge of what is good and what is evil. But since there WAS a tree, then they didn’t have those qualities. Therefore, they were NOT made in God’s image as the Bible states. A major quality that separates humans from beasts, is that we have ethics and morals and we have choice about how to apply those ethics and morals. Beasts don’t. Without knowing right from wrong, i.e. “good” from “evil” we would not be truly made in God’s image. Therefore, “perfect” Adam and Eve were not made in God’s image at all and the Genesis account has already and directly contradicted itself.

    So Eve says to Adam, “Hey Adam! Do you know what ‘good’ is?”

    Adam replies, “Nope, I don’t have a clue. The only way to find out is to eat some of that there fruit over there.”

    Eve: “Aren’t you the least bit curious about what ‘good’ is?”

    Adam: “Hell, yes I am! They haven’t even invented television yet! This place is totally boring. I could use some excitement. What do ya say we go eat some of that fruit and find out?”

    Eve: “Sounds good to me. Let’s do it!”

    They ate of the fruit.

    Adam: “Tastes good!”

    Eve: “Ummmm, yummy. Did you learn anything yet, Adam?”

    Adam: “Yes. NOW I know what God was talking about.”

    Eve: “Yeah, me too. I have this strange urge to put on clothes, and I didn’t even know what clothes were before I ate.”

    Adam: “I have the same feeling, hon. Clothes must be GOOD then. Or maybe they’re EVIL. Yeah, they HAVE to be evil, since we just disobeyed that command; because if clothes were good, we would have worn them from the start. This is true since God is Good and we’re made in his image. Hell, Eve, I’m more confused now than EVER!”

    (So am I at this point, by the way……)

    And so Adam was not himself deceived, but he thoroughly deceived Eve. That’s ANOTHER contradiction with the Bible. J No woman worth her head covering would “run ahead” of her husband, especially since he was the only husband to be had on the entire planet. But, I digress.

    So they ate the fruit, and God was really pissed. He states that they have now become one of US and now know the difference between good and evil. Once again, this shows that they did not know the difference before they ate. Herein lies another problem: what exactly happened that caused them to know this? The Bible said they became ashamed and fearful. But being ashamed is not good, nor is it evil. Neither is being fearful. Those are just feelings. SOMETHING caused them to gain this knowledge, though. It HAD to be something in the fruit! The fruit was rigged with some sort of DNA or chemicals or magical potion, or something. God boobie-trapped the fruit. If you want to argue that it wasn’t the fruit, but that God himself instantly wired their brains the minute they ate of that fruit, then God is to blame for the whole damn thing. He didn’t have to wire their brains if he didn’t want to. Neither did he have to boobie-trap the fruit if that’s the way he did it. Either way, God screwed them both and all of humanity to follow. He didn’t have to put that darn tree there in the first place for that matter!

    And here is another thing that really pisses me off: Did God put that tree someplace that made it difficult for Adam and Eve to approach? You know, like at the very far end of the garden, or on some little island on a lake or across a raging river? NO! He put it smack-dab in the middle of the garden. Whenever they crossed the garden from any direction that tree was staring them in their face. Not only that, God went out of his way to make that tree “something to be longed for the eyes” and “desirable to look upon” (Gen. 3:6)

    Simply put, God went out of his way to induce them to commit a crime. We have a word for that: it is called “entrapment.”

    If he had made the tree difficult to access and unattractive looking, it would have been good evidence that Adam and Ever were just plain jerks, bent on doing bad when they ate of it. Wait a minute! They didn’t know what BAD was, so how could they have known that eating of that tree was bad? Because God told them not to do it? How would they know that whatever God told them to do was bad or good. They didn’t have a clue about the concept of good OR bad! And if they did know that what God told them to do was for their own good, then they had SOME knowledge of good and evil, yet according to the Bible they didn’t have that until they ate of that tree. This circular reasoning is giving me a headache.

    But I digress again.

    God made sure they 1) had tons of time on their hands and 2) an irresistibly attractive tree would be staring at them as frequently as possible.

    It was a set-up.

    If they were perfect humans at the start as the WTS claims, and if they were “made in God’s image” as the Bible claims they would have HAD to know the difference between good and evil. Otherwise, they would have been worse than we schmucks who are imperfect yet do know the difference: they would have been morons without any moral compass for life whatsoever. But they DIDN’T know the difference or there would have been no need for that tree. (One simple damn fruit tree doomed the entire human race. Isn’t THAT ironic?) Is it just me, or are you beginning to see all the obvious contradictions here?

    Now, we have another few sticky details to look at. Genesis 2:5 states that there were no bushes and no vegetation that had sprouted because it hadn’t rained and there was no man to cultivate the ground. Duh! No rain, no bush: nothing to cultivate! But then immediately after that it said that a “mist” came UP from the ground (instead of rain falling DOWN to the ground) that watered the earth. Well, duh! If there was water available to those bushes and other vegetation they WOULD have sprouted, but the Bible said they HADN’T spouted because “there was no rain!” Man, this headache is turning into a migraine!

    Verse 8 of Chapter 2 in Genesis stated that Eden was to the “East.” East of WHAT? East of God? If that’s true, then God is in a “place” that has three dimensions. East from the perspective of the Bible writer of that book? Well, that makes more sense, but why was the respective direction of Eden important to mention at all? God made sure the place was “hidden” until it was over-grown with crabgrass and stuff. Well, one darn good reason for that was to hide the evidence! If Eden could never be found by anyone then you sure can’t prove it did not exist! (That’s sort of like those invisible comings and heavenly kingdoms and demons and heavenly battles the WTS is so fond of: you can’t prove us wrong!) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    God could have done one simple thing to convince everyone on this planet that the Adam and Eve story and their fall and its consequences were all absolutely true. He could have preserved that Garden and stationed a few well-armed angels to take care of it and give guided-tours. Hey, if you were able to take a tour and when you got to the entrance you saw these angles with those whirly-blade sword thingama-jobbers, would YOU doubt the Genesis story? I sure the hell wouldn’t! If you walked through the grounds and saw lions eating grass who also would let you pet them, would YOU doubt the Genesis story? Not me, bubba. No, God didn’t do that. He destroyed all the evidence. It wouldn’t have been that difficult for him to preserve a few grass-eating lions, piranha, and crocodiles to keep in a little garden.

    The WTS claims that Adam and Eve were created to live forever, but Gen. 3:22 says God kicked them out of the Garden so they couldn’t eat of the “tree of life” and live to “time indefinite.” This implies that until Adam and Eve ate of that tree of life, they would not be able to live not only forever, but even to “time indefinite.” This is the final sticky issue I want to address. Adam and Eve’s bodies were not made to live a long, long time. If they were, there would have been no need for a “tree of life.” Either they were pre-rigged in such a way that they would die unless they ate of that tree of life and that tree contained some magic potion that would undo that rigging, or God would have had to tinker with their genes after they ate of that tree to make them live long, long lives or even forever.

    This is important to remember. They were NOT initially set-up to live long, long lives. One cannot argue that they were, because of that pesky “tree of life” verse. God COULD have been a little more optimistic and created them to live long, lives, and later messed them up when they disobeyed him, but it turns out that God was a pessimist from the get-go and assumed the worse by the was he set things up. He didn’t even trust his OWN creation. Strange God, that.

    Therefore, the God of Genesis created the first pair pre-supposing they would be doomed. He made the tree of knowledge overwhelmingly resistible, they succumbed and he doomed them. And us.

    Worse than that, that same God doesn’t have an ounce of logic. But he was smart enough to figure out that billions of people who believe all that crap don’t have any logic, either. So he got one thing right!

    We all still got screwed, though.

    Farkel

  • Moxy
    Moxy

    I think you're reading too much into a nice little, enduring fable about loss of innocence and incommensurates.

    i wonder where you learned to do that... :)

    mox

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    : I think you're reading too much into a nice little, enduring fable

    There are about one billion people who do believe that story to be true. I'm writing for those from that group who are lurking. The rest of us know it's a fable. If we all thought it was a fable, I would not have wasted my time.

    Farkel

  • crossroads
    crossroads

    Farkel,
    I agree with you I tried to start something like this
    in a thread about Ruby Slippers never really took off
    You'll probably will have better luck.

    If being perfect meant living forever why the tree of
    life? If sinning caused death why did he have to
    keep them and other humans from getting to the
    tree of life. Moxy we are not reading to much into it we are just reading it.

  • Moxy
    Moxy

    yeah, i know farkel. i just thought it was a pithy observation about old habits. but on another level, it actually does bother me to have to apply all this analytical power to the genesis story for the reason that it really is a very, very nice piece of literature. the original work by J, once seperated from later redactions and editions, is a very moving, memorable story with lots of subtle ironies. its a shame what fundamentlism has done to it.

    mox

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Moxy,

    : but on another level, it actually does bother me to have to apply all this analytical power to the genesis story for the reason that it really is a very, very nice piece of literature.

    There's always a method to my madness, Moxy. The veracity (or not) of this story underwrites the "explanation" for dubs and many others for the entire history and existence and troubles for all of mankind. It also underwrites the need for a "ransom" wherein God decided to let his own first-born be brutally murdered. Most importantly, it underwrites the entire purpose for Christ to visit this planet. If the Genesis story didn't happen, there would be no need for Christ and his death.

    If dubs and others can understand the stupidty of that "entire foundation" and the concept of "original sin," then maybe they will begin to scrutinize the rest of the Bible and their religion, instead of reading that information with one-way blinders.

    Anyway, that is my intent.

    Farkel

  • wannahelp
    wannahelp

    Here's another take on that story..

    What if we weren't created by god, but evolved naturally like the rest of the living creatures on the earth?

    The difference that seperates us from the rest of the animals is that we can reason, and most importantly, we are aware of our own existence, and thus, are aware that we will eventually die..

    Is it possible that the "tree of knowledge" represented the point when man became aware of his existence? I.E. At that point, he became man, and not just an animal living for his animal existence (food, procreation, shelter).. But, once we "knew" that we were alive and were able to make choices for our own existence, we could feel "happy, sad, anger, etc...".. And, of course, we also knew that we would die some day...

    Just a thought..

  • kes152
    kes152

    Congratulations!!!

    Mr. Farkel,

    You are the FIRST person, ever, for the 2 years i've been on the internet to ACTUALLY give me a Headache.

    MDS, bjc, et. al. you all have your "moments" but this one, oh MY, I now have the WORST headache ever.....

    Peace to you,
    Aaron

  • unclebruce
    unclebruce

    Beautiful piece of work Bro Farkel,

    The voices in my head tell me that God created Adam because he was lonely. He then created Eve 'cos Adam was lonely ... then a snake because Eve was lonely ... anyhow loneliness is the key to bible understaning. God got jealous and wanted Isaac, he then got lusty and had his way with Mary, Jesus came to earth but God demanded him back. The Bibles's all a sorry series of lust, murder and mayhem with deep unexplained loneliness fueling it all. Perhaps we could join forces and write "The Bible - What really happened" ... um ... "God for Dummies?" .. bound to be a best seller with Communist revolutionaries the world over.

    PS: The wife wiped my email off this computer :( I'll try again tonight

  • Camay
    Camay

    That is very interesting indeed. Might I suggest a book titled The old and new Testaments "ASIMOV'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE" BY ISAAC ASIMOV its very interesting and sheds some light on the bible its self.

    This guy is a excellent scientist and writer he has over 100 books.
    the book is about 1300 pages. Its not easy reading but I found it
    great as a reference book to the bible.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit