Does Knowledge of Evil Condemn Us?

by JosephAlward 63 Replies latest jw friends

GWEEDO

Achristian
You read the story of Adam and Eve as saying "eternal life" was something Adam and Eve already had, and would continue to have so long as they stayed away from that tree.
Yes...
Wanna know why?
here it is:
8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 And the Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground-trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
God plants a lot of trees. Notice in particular the planting of the tree of life
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 of it you will surely die."
God permits them to eat of all trees except one. That would include the tree of life.
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."
The tree of life was a tree that allowed them to live forever
I read it as saying that "eternal life" was a gift God said He would give to Adam and Eve if they stayed away from that tree for a predetermined, but unmentioned, period of time.
you read it as saying that?????
where does it say that in Genesis?
I think "unmentioned" is the key word here!!!!
If they had managed to do so, God would have then allowed them to eat from the tree of life. Doing so would have then made them immortal, something they obviously were not, since we know they both later died.
They were already permited to eat of ALL the trees except one, that includes the tree of life which the bible clearly tells us gave Adam and eve eternal life.
Your making stuff up!!!!!!
The difference in the way we understand the story comes from the different ways we understand the words "eternal life."
you think so...
I think our difference here stems from the fact one of us is reading the bible a little more clearly. The other person seems to be making stuff up to suit himself. The latter is you, just in case you aint clued in...
As a former JW, you still have the JW understanding of "eternal life." JWs say that in the new world, even after the 1000 years have ended, some people who have been given "eternal life" might still sin, and when they do God will then ZAP them. This kind of "eternal life" does not sound very "eternal" to me.
Trying to attach me to the dubs is irrelevant. I'm reading it for what it says...forget the dubs
As a Christian, I have the Christian view of eternal life. "Eternal life" to Christians means "immortality." (1 Cor. 15) Having "immortality" means a person possessing within themself the ability to live forever. Adam and Eve were able to die and so obviously they were never given "eternal life" by God as Christians understand it, immortality.
As a """christian""" understands it.... blah blah blah. I think most Christians wouldn't understand what your talking about. I guess they arn't true Christians then...unlike you...
Trying to align me with the dubs and paint yourself as a true "Christian" really dont wash with me. Just words and labels...doesn't prove your point one bit.
I'm clearly reading Genesis for what it says here. My definition of Eternal life is living forever DUH!, they are so obviously one and the same. To live forever was something Adam and Eve were already permited, as I and Genesis keep saying.That was the default state of man.
start again...Try and explain myself as clear as possible.
Adam and eve live in a Garden where God has planted a lot of trees. God permits them to eat of ALL the trees. One of the trees is the tree of life that permits them to live forever. They are told if they eat of another tree they will die. They disobey God, eat of this other tree, grow old and die exactly as God said. God evicts Adam and Eve from the Garden and any access to the tree of life they initially had.

If God didn't intend for Adam and eve to live forever then it makes no sense for him to intially allow them access to a tree that allowed them to do so.
"You are free to eat from any tree in the garden"
They were granted the right to live forever, or eternal life. Simple...
You wrote: There is a big difference between the little bit of suffering I would allow my kids to endure and what God allows.

So you admit that you would allow your children to suffer for a while in order to learn valuable lessons or to achieve a greater good. Let's say, for instance, they had to undergo a long painful surgical procedure in order to avoid much longer and much greater pain later on in their life. Then you would most likely allow them to suffer for hours, or days, or weeks, or maybe even months. But if God, with our eternities in His view, for very similar reasons, allows some of us to suffer for similar or, in some cases, slightly longer periods of time you condemn Him for doing so.
Like I said, what I would allow my kids to suffer in no way compares to what God has allowed. If i had the power to erradicate disease, I'd do it in an instant. God on the other hand allows it...even creates it. He created some really great diseases didn't he. I, myself, wouldn't inject my kids with a disease...but thats exactly what God has done in effect.
To teach a kid not to go near the Stove, for example, I might tell the kid that it hot, it'll hurt big time if she touches it. If the kid goes near it I might give him/her a smack. God on the other hand it seems would want to rub the kids hand fair into the hot plate and then beat the living hell out of the kid, then kick them out of home with no medical aid...even if they went nowhere near the stove. Ones called being a good parent...the other is called child abuse.
The fact is, someone who didn't know and understand why you were allowing your child to undergo a very long and very painful surgical procedure might also question your love and compassion. In the same way that you now question God's.
The fact is there is no comparison between what I'd allow as far as suffering is concerned and what God has allowed. God is cruel in the extreme. Ever had cancer? That was a nice little invention of Gods huh! How about the Plague...Aids...Mad cow disease...I could go on. I coudn't even concieve of creating such things. I couldn't even concieve of allowing such things to exist if I had the power to erradicate them.
Seriously, what lesson is God trying to teach us. What lesson could he possibly be teaching us that requires such extreme pain and cruelty?
If a person came up to me and questioned why I allowed my child to undergo an operation. I would explain the reasons for it. I would say it is to get rid of the brain tumor that God so loving created. I'd be open with the person who asked me and I'd explain myself.

OK
Lets ask God
Dear God why is it that you allow such pain and suffering in this world. Please tell us. Maybe you could just reduce it a bit. Maybe you could give us a cure for cancer...certainly your omnipotent enough to do that. Maybe you could just provide us with a better painkiller than morphine or heroin. I mean, thankyou so much for the opium poppy...but it really isn't good enough
Please get back to me
Heres my Phone number:
0304 2789564
Thanks for your consideration....
GWEEDO

Faithful
>>>> Of course there is no mention of Satan in Genesis for some strange reason.
"So the Lord God said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this ... And I will put enmity
between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.' " (Genesis 3:14,15)
With this passage from Genesis in mind, do you really think that anyone ever missed the idea that the snake in Eden was far more than an ordinary snake?
Obvioulsy it was more than an ordinary snake. IT TALKED. The guy who wrote genesis believed a talking snake corrupted adam and eve. He made no mention of Satan for some strange reason...The reason being that the concept of Satan was a later evolution because people eventually realised how dumb the taking snake idea was.
>>>>>> Well, I thought you guys were saying God was the one who set up the test. So I thought by that logic you'd be saying God made the snake talk. But it was Satan. Was Satan a paid agent of God or something?
God no doubt knew Satan would try to talk Adam and Eve into disobeying Him. He knew Satan's nature. So God probably arranged to have a snake and no other animal near "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" the first time Eve was alone near that tree. That way Satan would have to use a snake to quite fittingly speak through.
why would he need to speak through a snake. Why didn't he just materialise or something...or just project his voice some? Hell...why the need for any animal or reptile??????????? weird!
JosephAlward

I guess you must realize you lost that debate because now you want to start discussing an entirely different subject.
Guess again; I've been waiting for you to respond to my last post on that debate. I assumed that you once again bailed out of it.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
aChristian

Gweedo,
You wrote: They were already permited to eat of ALL the trees except one, that includes the tree of life which the bible clearly tells us gave Adam and eve eternal life.
That is not necessarily the case. As we have discussed before in relation to the words "all" and "every" used in the Genesis flood account, these words in Hebrew are not all encompassing as they are in English. Hebrew lexicons tell us that they may also be properly translated as "many" and as "a variety of." This being so, it is quite possible that, though it is not mentioned in the text, God reserved the priviledge of eating from the tree of life until after Adam and Eve had passed their test. I believe that being given the right to eat from the tree of life was then and always has been a reward that is only given to someone after they successfully pass a test. I believe this is indicated by what Jesus said in Rev. 2:7. There he said, "To him who overcomes I will give the right to eat from the tree of life which is in the paradise of God."
But even if your understanding is correct, that Adam and Eve ate from the tree of life right along before they disobeyed God, I don't see that it changes things in this discussion. For eternal life was still not "the default state of man" as you put it. Dying was. For even according to you, Adam and Eve's being able to live "forever" was entirely dependent upon their eating from one particular tree. If they failed to eat from it on a regular basis they would die. If I need to take one particular medicine everyday or I will die, is eternal life my "default state"? I don't think so.
Your understanding does not differ significantly from mine. In effect you and I are both saying that God gave Adam and Eve a mortal nature along with the promise that they would never die if they passed a test. That being the case, I don't see that it really makes any difference to this discussion whether or not they were allowed to eat from the tree of life right along or if they were only given the right to eat from it after they passed their test.
You wrote: To live forever was something Adam and Eve were already permited.
But they didn't live forever. So I guess that makes God an "Indian giver." Whatever. I have no idea why I am arguing this with you. You think it is all total fiction anyway. You don't even believe, as some people do, that it is a divinely inspired parable containing very valuable lessons.
You wrote: Like I said, what I would allow my kids to suffer in no way compares to what God has allowed. If i had the power to erradicate disease, I'd do it in an instant. God on the other hand allows it...even creates it. ... God is cruel in the extreme. ... Seriously, what lesson is God trying to teach us. What lesson could he possibly be teaching us that requires such extreme pain and cruelty?
Some people feel that the existence of evil, for any length of time, is impossible to harmonize with the existence of a loving God. They say that the instant any evil appeared in a good God's universe He would have to immediately put an end to it. However, I believe God allows evil to exist, and actually designed our world with evil as a very important part of it, so that we may come to know both good and evil. I believe this first hand knowledge of both good and evil will serve all people well for all eternity, long after all evil has been removed from the universe. By God having designed a world where all people are certain to gain a first hand knowledge of evil, and more importantly the harmful effects of evil, all who choose to serve God will gain an understanding of why God's ways are the best ways, an understanding that will serve them well for all eternity.
Some respond to this by saying, "Even if God desired his children to be temporarily exposed to evil as a learning experience, a good God could never allow so much evil to exist." They say a good God would certainly severely limit the pain and suffering that He allowed His children to endure as a result of the evil He allowed and actually desired to temporarily exist. They look at the great suffering many people throughout history have endured and ask, "Wouldn't a loving God, if He existed, have stepped in and limited the amount of evil, pain and suffering these people had to endure? I believe questions such as this actually get to the heart of the problem of God permitting evil.
Let me ask you this. If a good God does exist, would you really believe He exists if you saw less evil in the world, if you saw people suffering less? I doubt it. For you know as well as I do that an all loving God, once He decided to stop evil, would have to stop all evil. If He were to stop only part of the evil, then wouldn't you still be asking the question, "If an all loving God exists, why is there evil in the world?" Would you really be any more likely to accept the existence of the God of the Bible if He stopped all pain caused by "natural causes," diseases, earthquakes and the like, but allowed people to continue hurting each other? I doubt it. For a perfectly righteous God, once He decided to bring about an end to evil, would have to bring about an end to all evil. He could not end all "natural" forms of evil but allow people to continue to murder each other. He could not prevent all murder but continue to permit beatings and rapes. He could not stop all beatings and rapes but continue to allow all robberies, cheating and adultery.
I think you get my point. Some maintain that any amount of pain or unrighteousness in the universe proves there is no God. However, I maintain that it has actually been by God's purpose that pain, death and evil have long existed in order for all of us to learn valuable lessons while being exposed to them. And because God is all loving, all knowing and all powerful, He cannot stop only some evil. The Bible tells us that God will one day bring an end to evil. And it tells us that when He does so, because He is all loving, all knowing and all powerful, He will then bring an end to all evil.
Of course, to us at this tiny moment in eternity, this process seems to be unnecessarily long. After all I am saying that God deliberately designed a world in which pain and suffering was an integral part for millions of years. Why for so long? Obviously I don't have all the answers. However, I do have faith. Faith that God arranged for things to take place as they are now taking place and as they have always taken place, for a purpose. I believe that purpose was most likely to teach us many great lessons. I believe we will learn all of these lessons when, in the future, we all have the ability to completely view and completely understand all that has taken place over the last fifteen billion years. Some of these lessons I have here mentioned. However I'm sure there are many other lessons which remain for us to learn, lessons which we will probably not understand for a very long time.
aChristian

Joseph,
I didn't respond to your last post on the subject matter we were originally discussing because I thought Faithful's response to it summed things up just fine.
He wrote the following:
Joe said >>>>> God now will receive from man exactly the kind of love you claimed he never wanted.
What AC said God never wanted was a love man had not freely chosen to give him.
Joe said >>>>>> I think your theology is nonsensical.
Face it, Joe, to you all theology is nonsensical. You know as well as I do that no matter how anyone believing in God explained their beliefs to you, you would say they are "nonsensical."
JosephAlward

I maintain that it has actually been by God's purpose that pain, death and evil have long existed in order for all of us to learn valuable lessons while being exposed to them.
So, you think the only reason for the monstrous evil that has plagued mankind for millenia is that God wanted us to learn certain lessons by example?
Why would God--if it exists--allow such unspeakable evil to exist in this world, allow--indeed, even ORDER the killing of suckling babes (1 Samuel 15:1-3)--all for the purpose of teaching man certain lessons, when there was available to this all-powerful god a far more benevolent method of instructing his creations?
You agree, do you not, AChristian, that God can do anything he wants? He has embedded in man's DNA the life force, the instinctive drive toward obtaining nourishment, to obtain sex to reproduce; he has given man the ability to contemplate his own existence, and that of the universe, has he not?
Why, then--if this god really exists--did he not just embed into the DNA of man whatever "lessons" you think he wanted man to learn, so he would know these things naturally, in the same manner that man knows instinctively to seek oxygen, food, and sex? God can make man's heart beat automatically, his lungs to breath, so why didn't God--if he exists--just make man automatically know all of those lessons you think are so important, without having to let so many babies be murdered over the millenia? God could have done that, couldn't he, since he's all powerful?
The fact that your god didn't do this should show you that your god only exists in your imagination.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
GWEEDO

Achristian
Let me ask you this. If a good God does exist, would you really believe He exists if you saw less evil in the world, if you saw people suffering less?
I dont really see the point of the question. What does it matter whether I believe he exists or not. God could easily prove his existence to me...all he has to do is walk into living room and show himself and I'll believe. Yet he refuses to do so.
Anyway...
The point is, God calls himself a God of love. How can anyone reconcile the suffering and pain we see around us with a God of Love?
As I see it, we have these options
God exists....hes Omnipotent but refuses to get rid of evil and suffering. He's really not loving at all therefore.
or
God exists...he is hardly what you'd call a God...he doesn't have the power to remove suffering even though he may wish to.
or
God just doesn't exist
or
There is some way of reconciling the Suffering in the world with a God of Love. In which case, do tell?
You say we are to learn a lesson from all the death and disease and evil around. What lessons? how? This is a pretty vague answer.
Suppose for arguments sake there are lessons to be learnt. I might have accepted this a few years ago. But surely God doesn't need to let suffering go to the extreme lengths we see in this world to teach these lessons. Surely these lessons, whatever they are, need not require the extreme amount of suffering we see around us. Surely God could do away with disease and earthquakes etc. Surely he can minimise the amount of suffering in the world and still teach us a lesson. He doesn't need to break the stick like he's doing...he only needs to bend it a little. I mean, to teach a kid not to go near a stove I only need to reason with him/her a little, and perhaps dish out a little punishment like a smack. I DONT need to belt the living crap out of the kid to within an inch of its life....thats not teaching a lesson, thats child abuse.
I see no need for for God to allow disease, genetic deformities...things like cerebral palsy, earth quakes. The rape, torture and murder of children. I see no reason why these are necessary. What lesson could possibly be learnt from them. Perhaps a little hardship is good for the soul...but certainly not the extreme hardship we see in this world that is utterly soul destroying for many people.
Also...
I certainly cant understand a God that seems to take an active involvment in evil. A God that says he will punish sons for the crimes of a father..for generation after generation. I cant understand why God punished 1000's of people for something King david did in taking a census, and then turns around and commands the following:
Deuteronomy 24
16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.

What reason is there for evil and suffering?
You admit you have no answer:
Of course, to us at this tiny moment in eternity, this process seems to be unnecessarily long. After all I am saying that God deliberately designed a world in which pain and suffering was an integral part for millions of years. Why for so long? Obviously I don't have all the answers. However, I do have faith. Faith that God arranged for things to take place as they are now taking place and as they have always taken place, for a purpose. I believe that purpose was most likely to teach us many great lessons. I believe we will learn all of these lessons when, in the future, we all have the ability to completely view and completely understand all that has taken place over the last fifteen billion years. Some of these lessons I have here mentioned. However I'm sure there are many other lessons which remain for us to learn, lessons which we will probably not understand for a very long time.
Basically your answer is Trust in God. Trust there are answers. Not really an answer though...
*heck I'm tired. Joseph just made a pretty good point above dont you think
aChristian

Gweedo,
You wrote: Joseph just made a pretty good point above dont you think?
No, I don't. He made basically the same old argument he has been making right along, which I have already refuted.
He asked: Why, then--if this god really exists--did he not just embed into the DNA of man whatever "lessons" you think he wanted man to learn, so he would know these things naturally?
That's very similar to his question, "Why didn't God just make us all incorruptible to begin with?" My answer to that question was, "Because God wanted us to be able to freely choose how we would live our lives and freely choose who we would love. Real love cannot be forced or programmed."
The same would be true for various moral "lessons" if God had "embedded" them into our DNA, as Joseph says He should have done.
I believe God desires that we all gain a first hand "knowledge of good and evil" so that we may all decide for ourselves if we feel God's ways are the best ways. By allowing us to personally experience both "good and evil" God provides us with all the information we need to make a fully informed decision to either accept Him or reject Him. If God had shown us only one side of the story, His side, any decision we made to serve Him would not really be a free decision. And certainly if God had "embedded" various moral lessons, such as "God's ways are the best ways," into our DNA any decision we made to serve Him would not be a free decision.
GWEEDO

Achristian
He asked: Why, then--if this god really exists--did he not just embed into the DNA of man whatever "lessons" you think he wanted man to learn, so he would know these things naturally?

, "Because God wanted us to be able to freely choose how we would live our lives and freely choose who we would love. Real love cannot be forced or programmed."
I dont know about that one
It wouldn't make us unfree. We would still be free to choose to follow God or not. We would just have knowledge of these lessons God wanted us to know
I think in the future science will allow us to put thoughts and understanding directly into our brain. Like in the film the Matrix. Maybe God could have just programmed these lessons he wants us to learn into our DNA or hard wire it to our brain so we have an instinctive knowledge of them... a mental understanding of them from birth. We would still be free to choose to abide by them or not. We would just have greater knowledge.
Faithful2Jah

Gweedo said >>>>>>>> Maybe God could have just programmed these lessons he wants us to learn into our DNA or hard wire it to our brain ... like in the Matrix.
Sorry, Gweedo, I didn't see "The Matrix." A dummy like me was probably reading a book at the time. One without pictures.
Man, you guys are something else. Let's see. You say if God had done it your way - the right way - the "Matrix" way - he would not have had to expose you to any evil for you to learn any lessons from it. And then if you were never exposed to any evil you would never be able to be corrupted by it. Because if there was nothing to corrupt you, or as Joe would have it if you were incorruptible to begin with, you would automatically be worthy of eternal life. Which you say God should have given you to begin with anyway. And you say God should appear right in front of you so there will be no doubt about his existence.
You guys have got it all figured out how God should have done it. He should have made nothing that might corrupt you, or made you incorruptible, so you wouldn't have to go to any trouble taking a stand against evil and for what is right. He should have put any thing he wanted you to learn or know already in your head to begin with, so you wouldn't have to go to any trouble learning anything. And he should appear right in front of you, so you wouldn't have to go to all the trouble of deciding for yourself whether God exists and whether you should serve him. Then you say he should just give you eternal life, not because you have done anything that might in some small way make you worthy of it. Like maybe freely loving what is good and hating what is bad. No, that might require that you go to all the trouble of actually thinking, all by yourself. Because even that it seems would be too much trouble for you.
How dare God require anything at all from you, just because he is going to give you eternal life. Of all the nerve!

Does Knowledge of Evil Condemn Us?

Share this