The Tree Of Knowledge

[Stevil]

The tree of knowledge

You just made that stuff up. Your interpretation is fascinating. Of course as a Christian that is your right, to interprete as you please and make stuff up to satisfy your wants and desires. By personalising your belief, you couldn't possibly not believe it.

I have my own interpretation. Do you want to hear it?
No?
Oh well, I'm going to write it up anyway. You can choose not to read if you wish :-)

The common theme of the bible is the forgo knowledge and instead seek guidance and faith.
The method is to break down the reader's sense of self worth and replace this with a dependency relationship with the book, the faith and those that choose to represent it with authority.
The story of the tree of knowledge is the introduction of this theme. It is the inception of self doubt into the reader's mind, the idea that seeking knowledge of anything is flawed as one's self is flawed and cannot comprehend anything fully especially in comparison to an all knowing god.

It was simply a tree which Jehovah used as a representation of his right to decide for his creation what was right and what was wrong. A representation of his authority. His sovereignty. In deliberately taking of the fruit of that forbidden tree Adam was in effect saying "I will know for myself what is good and what is bad."

As a Father I find the above unfathomable. My responsibility to my dependent children is to prepare them for the world, to move them away from dependency and towards independence. It is in their independence that I will measure my success as a Father.

But the intent of this story is to break down the reader. To suggest that they are wrong to think for themselves, that they should instead submit to Jehovah as the all knowing wise authority. That the reader is wrong in their stubborn pride to foolishly think that they could make better decisions than Jehovah, that they are unworthy sinners whom must redeem themselves by forsaking their sinful pride and submitting with obedience to the guidance of Jehovah. It is only by following the book and those that represent it with authority that we can earn back our rightful place where we belong which is in god's grace.

It was that they judged for themselves what was good and what was bad. They rejected him. They were not listening to him.

Here we have the propaganda machine cranking into action instigating a polarised view that you can only be for or against.
If you choose not to obey, then you are choosing to reject the all knowing, all wise, all loving, all good Jehovah. There is no in between. How could you reject the perfect Jehovah? Are you that black hearted? You have no choice but to accept, submit and obey.

In a footnote to Genesis 2:17, the Jerusalem Bible says this: "This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, Genesis 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on God's sovereignty, a sin of pride."

This is nothing less than brainwashing. We have chosen to be sinners by attacking god due to our flaw of pride. We deserve to take our rightful place by god's side but must strive to redeem our unworthy selves, to repent and ask for forgiveness.

Yes, we get the picture, breakdown our self worth, our independence, get us to strive for unification by submission and obedience.

If this were the inspired word of god, then we can only conclude that god is a deficient, self centered, insecure Father.
However the bible is not the word of god. It is the word of man demanding obedience in an attempt to gain power and control.

[OldGit]

Disobeyed their father, the ultimate sin in an alpha male dominated triabalistic society.

Thanks, but I'm still not there yet.  Really, not just being argumentative.  Why did God tell them not to, and not to do what, exactly?  In other words, why should it be wrong to distinguish good from evil, or to learn how to do so?

The story of the tree of knowledge is the introduction of this theme. It is the inception of self doubt into the reader's mind, the idea that seeking knowledge of anything is flawed as one's self is flawed and cannot comprehend anything fully especially in comparison to an all knowing god.

Maybe that's it.  It makes more sense than many explanations I've seen.

[Too Few Lions]

Interesting, TFL, thank you.  But I'm still no wiser as to what Adam and Eve did that was so wrong.

neither am I, I think the story's slightly Gnostic / similar to Platonic philosophy, in assuming that mankind fell from a heavenly source and became exiled in the material world. I think the axis mundi is important because it was the route between heaven and earth in many traditions, and it still is in shamanic religions to this day.

[Tank]

Disobeyed their father, the ultimate sin in an alpha male dominated triabalistic society.

Thanks, but I'm still not there yet.  Really, not just being argumentative.  Why did God tell them not to, and not to do what, exactly?  In other words, why should it be wrong to distinguish good from evil, or to learn how to do so?

The story of the tree of knowledge is the introduction of this theme. It is the inception of self doubt into the reader's mind, the idea that seeking knowledge of anything is flawed as one's self is flawed and cannot comprehend anything fully especially in comparison to an all knowing god.

Maybe that's it.  It makes more sense than many explanations I've seen.

I think Stevil's post says it all really. It's all about emotional abuse and bullying to keep people in-line and subservient to the tribal elders, in this case the people who benefit most from institutionalised superstitions, the priests.

[Earthling]

I think Stevil's post says it all really. It's all about emotional abuse and bullying to keep people in-line and subservient to the tribal elders, in this case the people who benefit most from institutionalised superstitions, the priests.

If you look at the Bible, it would become obvious that that wasn't a very plausible explanation, especially when having to sustain itself over thousands of years. It was pretty obvious it wasn't working. God Jehovah foretold that it wouldn't work.   

[Earthling]

The tree of knowledge had no magical or supernatural properties.
{snip}

Correct, as it never existed.

Okay, then what was it presented as in the alleged fictional account?

[Earthling]

Catholics believe in original sin. This makes it impossible for us to be perfect and without sin, hence Jesus demonstration is unattainable for us mortals. It seems like he was gloating that he is better than us, this seems like a cruel joke.

Catholics are an organized religion. Jesus being without sin, though tempted in ways we can't imagine, remained faithful. You know, the Catholics, though their literature will reveal the true origins of hell and immortal soul, think when you die if you are "bad" you go to hell. But the Bible says that sin = death. Take away sin and you take away death. The Bible says that upon death the debt of sin is paid in full, so there can't be a hell or purgatory.

The Bible says that there will be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous.

To answer your question after resurrection of the dead we can become like Jesus, without sin, and live forever upon the Earth. 

[Asmodean]

Interesting, TFL, thank you.  But I'm still no wiser as to what Adam and Eve did that was so wrong.

Disobeyed their father, the ultimate sin in an alpha male dominated triabalistic society.

...Unless you manage to plant a pickaxe between his eyes, in which case you get the α and all the chicks.

[Tank]

The tree of knowledge had no magical or supernatural properties.
{snip}

Correct, as it never existed.

Okay, then what was it presented as in the alleged fictional account?

There fixed it for you. You see fiction is 'made up shit', facts can be varified by evidence and/or direct observation. There is no reliable evidence that the garden of eden existed nor the tree that was supposed to be in it.

[Stevil]

I think Stevil's post says it all really. It's all about emotional abuse and bullying to keep people in-line and subservient to the tribal elders, in this case the people who benefit most from institutionalised superstitions, the priests.

If you look at the Bible, it would become obvious that that wasn't a very plausible explanation, especially when having to sustain itself over thousands of years. It was pretty obvious it wasn't working. God Jehovah foretold that it wouldn't work.   

It is obvious to me that the Christian faith has persisted due to this brainwashing mechanism coupled with the instilled fear of a perceived eternal damnation if the "rules" are not followed as well as the evangelism drive riddled through the insipid bible.
This was also helped in no small part by the political muscle that brought Christianity into popular-ism throughout Rome. Obviously the Roman rulers saw this at the time as a useful tool to gain control over its people. Then the British Empire also seeing the usefulness of this as a tool to control its people took this in its expansion across the world. Those that resisted were put to death.

[Earthling]

I have my own interpretation. Do you want to hear it?
No?
Oh well, I'm going to write it up anyway. You can choose not to read if you wish :-)

I'd love to hear it.

The common theme of the bible is the forgo knowledge and instead seek guidance and faith.
The method is to break down the reader's sense of self worth and replace this with a dependency relationship with the book, the faith and those that choose to represent it with authority.
The story of the tree of knowledge is the introduction of this theme. It is the inception of self doubt into the reader's mind, the idea that seeking knowledge of anything is flawed as one's self is flawed and cannot comprehend anything fully especially in comparison to an all knowing god.

An all knowing god. Hmm.

Do you know that thousands of years before science determined it the Bible said the earth was spherical and hanging upon nothing? Do you know that just up until about 100 years ago the medical doctor would go from the morgue to the birthing room without so much as washing his hands - strictly against Biblical laws of cleanliness. Do you know that the Bible described the hydro-cycle thousands of years before it was described by science.

You don't know these things because you have foregone knowledge. 

As a Father I find the above unfathomable. My responsibility to my dependent children is to prepare them for the world, to move them away from dependency and towards independence. It is in their independence that I will measure my success as a Father.

Which is exactly God's plan. It can't be determined how much time evolved between Adam's creation and his sin, but he was relatively young and his father didn't think he was ready to "go out into the world." He wanted only to prepare Adam and Eve for this. That is what they rejected.

But the intent of this story is to break down the reader. To suggest that they are wrong to think for themselves, that they should instead submit to Jehovah as the all knowing wise authority.

No, it is to inform the reader of the choices having been made, and the possible alternative. It warns of what will happen with man and Satan's system and look around you? Do you not agree that it is a plausible concept that man would destroy himself and life on this planet? It gives the reader a choice.

That the reader is wrong in their stubborn pride to foolishly think that they could make better decisions than Jehovah, that they are unworthy sinners whom must redeem themselves by forsaking their sinful pride and submitting with obedience to the guidance of Jehovah. It is only by following the book and those that represent it with authority that we can earn back our rightful place where we belong which is in god's grace.

That isn't the way I would put it but consider the possibility that that is exactly the case. What if I'm wrong. I die and I'm worm food. I wasn't disallowed any opportunity for ignorance, not even with the subject of the Bible by your suggestion out of almost complete ignorance. I can choose to ignore the Bible's advice or take it to heed. As the Bible put it, we may have faith but the demons know and yet shudder.

Lets say you are wrong and then consider the possibility that all you have done is influenced or encouraged maybe a handful of people, out of again, almost complete ignorance, to reject Jehovah God's guidance and protection - life everlasting in paradise conditions. And that handful of people influence or encourage another, and another etc. 

All out of ignorance in the guise of depravity of knowledge?

Here we have the propaganda machine cranking into action instigating a polarised view that you can only be for or against.

If you choose not to obey, then you are choosing to reject the all knowing, all wise, all loving, all good Jehovah. There is no in between. How could you reject the perfect Jehovah? Are you that black hearted? You have no choice but to accept, submit and obey.

That isn't true at all. Why do you think 144,000 people will immediately be taken in spirit form to heaven, which was not created for them as was earth? To judge and rule with Christ Jesus? Why?! Well, because Jehovah God and Jesus Christ have no knowledge of what it is like to live in sin. How could it be fair for them to judge the angels and men?

Why does the Bible say there will be a resurrection of the unrighteous as well as the righteous? Because not all people ever having lived will have had the opportunity to be informed as you and I have. And we are all capable of making an informed choice. The rejection of that is up to us.

What it means is that without Jehovah God, our creator, we will destroy ourselves. That has to be obvious to everyone before it gets to the point where God takes control in order for him to have allowed the issue of sovereignty to be fairly settled. It is just a matter of choice to live forever under God's rule or choose not to. You can't have it both ways after a point.

All that will happen to those who choose against God is the death that the skeptic knows will be his end anyway.

This is nothing less than brainwashing. We have chosen to be sinners by attacking god due to our flaw of pride. We deserve to take our rightful place by god's side but must strive to redeem our unworthy selves, to repent and ask for forgiveness.

Yes, we get the picture, breakdown our self worth, our independence, get us to strive for unification by submission and obedience.

If this were the inspired word of god, then we can only conclude that god is a deficient, self centered, insecure Father.
However the bible is not the word of god. It is the word of man demanding obedience in an attempt to gain power and control.

You are being emotional and over dramatic and you are misinformed - and I must say - protest too much.

[Earthling]

Interesting, TFL, thank you.  But I'm still no wiser as to what Adam and Eve did that was so wrong.

I'm trying to keep up with the comments but there are many of you and only one of me, OldGit. Forgive me if I lapse and feel free, anyone, to remind me of anything I might have missed that you would like me to address.

To answer your question, do you recall when the angels came down to see if the complaint of Sodom and Gomorrah was warranted? And the homosexual men and young boys wanted to "get to know" the men (angels)?

By get to know the text means to become intimate with. Sexually experience, if you will. The tree of the knowledge of what is good and what is bad is a similar idea. Not about sex, but about the intimate knowledge. Adam wanted to experience the intimate knowledge of what was good and what was bad. To decide for himself. Adam chose to disrespect what was implemented to remind him of his obvious need for God's guidance and protection. He chose to get to know, to decide, what was good for himself rather than pay attention to God. He rejected God's guidance and protection in his "youth" so to speak.

He basically said, in effect to God: "You can piss off, I'm going to do this on my own."

I see it as a child being told to not play in the street and the child testing his father's advice with disastrous consequences. God didn't create the evil world we live in. We did against his advice. Like the young man given his first home by his father under the stipulation that he must respect and take care of it but not doing so until the father sees that he must step in to prevent the destructive son from destroying it for his younger brother who would respect it. 

Part of the negative effect is that the public, unknowing, may attribute the blame upon the father.

[Earthling]

The tree of knowledge had no magical or supernatural properties.
{snip}

Correct, as it never existed.

Okay, then what was it presented as in the alleged fictional account?

There fixed it for you. You see fiction is 'made up shit', facts can be varified by evidence and/or direct observation. There is no reliable evidence that the garden of eden existed nor the tree that was supposed to be in it.

There is the historical record of the Bible. Now you can't disprove it so give me your evidence against its reliability without the appalling and undeserved overconfidence. This is - what - the third time I have asked you? And you have given me NOTHING. Not very convincing. 

[Sandra Craft]

There is the historical record of the Bible. Now you can't disprove it so give me your evidence against its reliability without the appalling and undeserved overconfidence.  

Unless you can prove the bible is a reliable historical record, you have nothing but a storybook.  Now I know many Xtians hate having to prove a positive but since its not possible to prove a negative (just try finding proof that the invisible dragon in my garage doesn't exist) that's what you're stuck with.  Good luck, you're going to need it.

[DeterminedJuliet]

There is the historical record of the Bible. Now you can't disprove it so give me your evidence against its reliability without the appalling and undeserved overconfidence.  

Unless you can prove the bible is a reliable historical record, you have nothing but a storybook.  Now I know many Xtians hate having to prove a positive but since its not possible to prove a negative (just try finding proof that the invisible dragon in my garage doesn't exist) that's what you're stuck with.  Good luck, you're going to need it.

Even if you could prove, without a doubt, that the bible is a historical source, that still says nothing about it being "written by God." Or inspired by God. Or whatever. Ancient =/= holy.

Beyond that, I still don't understand why God would need to create human beings with choice at all. If he is a perfect, whole, all-powerful being - why doesn't he just sit around basking in his own awesomeness? Why would he create humans at all, give them choice and then spend the next 2 thousands years being disappointed in us because we chose to reject him?