why did god let adam and eve get decieved by the serpent

[invert_nexus]

I don't see where it says God was anxious in the story. And perhaps you might want to consider that it if wasn't just another "fruit tree", it probably wasn't a fruit at all (something edible). But I am just following your line about metaphors..

God was anxious because he clearly say's he's kicking them out of Eden because they now have knowledge of good and evil and are like "Us". And is worried that they will eat of the Tree of Life and live forever and then really be like "Us". Which, by the way is not forbidden. And now that they have knowledge of good and evil if God did command them not to eat of the Tree of Life then they would be in possession of just that faculty to obey this command. Worried. Anxious. See?

It's funny that God gives them a command that he know's they can't keep, then won't give them a command that they can keep.

And how do you know what the serpent meant by die? It is obvious he didn't mean physical death so that is incorrect. The spiritual separation that ensued is the death God spoke of and it came to pass so the serpent did lie.

Whew, really pulling them out of the air now, aren't you? So now die doesn't mean die... I can see why you want to cover for this one. Because God lied. Didn't he. Geneses 3:17 "but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." Hmm, Adam didn't die that day... Interesting. Let me throw you a rope. Latch on to surely. Surely might mean that on that day the surety of your death will come. Do you remember the first time you knew, really knew that you were going to die? And, by the way this could be applied to making the servant lieing in this particular aspect. He uses surely too. But, he still tells the truth about making A&E like God. God himself says the same thing.

Unless you are trying to say A&E didn't know the difference (assuming there was one) between the death the serpent spoke of and the death God spoke of, then you are grasping at straws.

Of course that's what I'm saying. How many times does it need to be said? A&E had not known death. This is where death enters the world. This is the original death story. Even though the coup de grace is held off til Cain and Abel. Sheesh.

And just who were the "Hebrews" you are talking about?

*sigh* Who do you think they are? They are the tribe of Abraham whose mythology we are all discussing. Perhaps "Hebrews" isn't the "proper" term. But, I think we can all understand what I'm talking about. head... bang... wall... why...

...unless she wasn't hungry for that tree so she ate from all the others which maybe eventually she would have eaten from the tree of good and evil for variety, heh.

One thing. They never ate of the Tree of Life. Even though there was no command against it. I can just imagine how succulent the fruit of that tree must have looked. *drool* And god never commanded them not to. This is an integral part of this version of the myth. It's a carrot on a stick. First man becomes mortal with the knowledge of good and evil. And then the promise of eternal life is hung just out of reach. Double whammy.

 

[§outh§tar]

This isn't answering all your comments invert_nexus but:

You said the Hebrews altered the meaning of some words and now you say they are the tribe of Abraham.
Do you know that ALL Jews are the tribe of Abraham?

Even at that time, you would be implying that ALL Hebrews altered the meaning of the original story. Or at least that Moses penned an altered version of the story.

Please clarify.

P.S. As for A&Eve not knowing the difference between deaths, that is impossible. If they did not know they would have asked, and alternatively, they already knew. I don't know of any other instance in the Bible where God gives man a command where a word is shrouded in ambiguity. And if they did not know but did not ask, surely God cannot be blamed then? But I do give them the benefit of the doubt.

P.P.S. As for the serpent telling Adam and Eve that they were going to be like God, they already were like God. Do you forget Adam was made in His image? Therefore that statement is surely incorrect. As for die not meaning physical death, the proof is in the text that they didn't die the same day so I don't know what point you are trying to make. ??

P.P.P.S.
As for God being worried, again that is baseless. There is absolutely NO indication that they were going to eat from the Tree of Life whatsoever, which is what you are basing your argument on.

Didn't mean to respond today but I guess I did. Woops!

 

[invert_nexus]

Ok, I'll tell the original myth from which the story of Adam and Eve was derived. Again. It's a nice story. I like it. It was not a story of the jews, hebrews, or whoever. It was a story of humanity in general. It was likely one of the original myths formed by our early ancestors and spread with them across the face of the earth. Variants are found everywhere.

In the depths of time. Long before the time in which we now live. There were people. But they were not like us. These people knew no suffering, no death, no want. They were playful and the world was young. It was a Dream-Time. Then, one day, one of these people killed another one. The story often varies on whether a man or a woman was the first murderer. But, there was a murder, often a decapitation. The killer was overcome with shame and guilt. New emotions that had never before been felt. This shame directed him/her to hide the body. S/he buried it (sometimes just the head.) From this burial grew a plant. The plant varies by region. It is usually the staple food plant. After this the dream-time was over. Man's existence was to toil and struggle. To live (which you can't say they were truly doing before) and to die. From death comes life, from life comes death.

*bows*

Now, again, can you see the similarities in the tales? See how things have been switched around? Motives changed? Consequences altered? As a little extra, the serpent, again, was considered to be consort to the goddess of the early peoples. The serpent signified knowledge and wisdom. See how he's been made the bad guy? See how the woman has been made the more wicked of the genders? It was a myth that was altered. Perhaps all at once by Abraham himself or some other even before him. Or perhaps it was changed a bit here, a bit there. But this is the source. And the end results are obvious.

As for A&Eve not knowing the difference between deaths, that is impossible. If they did not know they would have asked, and alternatively, they already knew.

What are you talking about? Surely die was a word. Two words actually. Who knows how many in the original language. There has been no death. There had been no true life, IMO. There was only the innocence of the Garden of Eden. The dream-time. God said you will surely die. I imagine that they might have assumed that to die is probably not the best thing that could happen, but who knows? The snake told them they wouldn't die. This is the crux. Without knowledge of G and E, they had no way to interpret the serpent's motives. They had no way to know that he was lying.

By the way, you never thanked me for throwing you that bone...

As for the serpent telling Adam and Eve that they were going to be like God, they already were like God. Do you forget Adam was made in His image? Therefore that statement is surely incorrect. As for die not meaning physical death, the proof is in the text that they didn't die the same day so I don't know what point you are trying to make. ??

You can't be serious. Did you read the verse I quoted at that point. On that day you will surely die. What does that mean? I gave you your way out with the use of surely...

And as to being like god, again, god says that he's throwing them out because they've eaten of the T of G and E and have become like god. Like Us, he says.

As for God being worried, again that is baseless. There is absolutely NO indication that they were going to eat from the Tree of Life whatsoever, which is what you are basing your argument on.

Aaaarrrrggghghhh!!! Again, god himself says that he's throwing them out of the garden lest they eat of the tree of life and become immortal like god. Immortality plus knowledge of good and evil > mere knowledge...

You're killing me, seriously.

Bye. Keep up the good work, fellows. I'm done with this. Again.... Why oh why do I try?

 

[§outh§tar]

Ok, I'll tell the original myth from which the story of Adam and Eve was derived. Again. It's a nice story. I like it. It was not a story of the jews, hebrews, or whoever. It was a story of humanity in general. It was likely one of the original myths formed by our early ancestors and spread with them across the face of the earth. Variants are found everywhere.

In the depths of time. Long before the time in which we now live. There were people. But they were not like us. These people knew no suffering, no death, no want. They were playful and the world was young. It was a Dream-Time. Then, one day, one of these people killed another one. The story often varies on whether a man or a woman was the first murderer. But, there was a murder, often a decapitation. The killer was overcome with shame and guilt. New emotions that had never before been felt. This shame directed him/her to hide the body. S/he buried it (sometimes just the head.) From this burial grew a plant. The plant varies by region. It is usually the staple food plant. After this the dream-time was over. Man's existence was to toil and struggle. To live (which you can't say they were truly doing before) and to die. From death comes life, from life comes death.

*bows*

Now, again, can you see the similarities in the tales? See how things have been switched around? Motives changed? Consequences altered? As a little extra, the serpent, again, was considered to be consort to the goddess of the early peoples. The serpent signified knowledge and wisdom. See how he's been made the bad guy? See how the woman has been made the more wicked of the genders? It was a myth that was altered. Perhaps all at once by Abraham himself or some other even before him. Or perhaps it was changed a bit here, a bit there. But this is the source. And the end results are obvious.

And because there are similar stories, that makes the Biblical genesis account fallible? Is that what you are basing your argument on???

What are you talking about? Surely die was a word. Two words actually. Who knows how many in the original language. There has been no death. There had been no true life, IMO. There was only the innocence of the Garden of Eden. The dream-time. God said you will surely die. I imagine that they might have assumed that to die is probably not the best thing that could happen, but who knows? The snake told them they wouldn't die. This is the crux. Without knowledge of G and E, they had no way to interpret the serpent's motives. They had no way to know that he was lying.

By the way, you never thanked me for throwing you that bone...

You can't be serious. Did you read the verse I quoted at that point. On that day you will surely die. What does that mean? I gave you your way out with the use of surely...

I already explained the word "die", what is your problem now?

---
And how do you know what the serpent meant by die? It is obvious he didn't mean physical death so that is incorrect. The spiritual separation that ensued is the death God spoke of and it came to pass so the serpent did lie.
---

And as to being like god, again, god says that he's throwing them out because they've eaten of the T of G and E and have become like god. Like Us, he says.

You are just taking the discussion in circles. The Bible speaks of man being created in God's image BEFORE they ate of the tree, NOT after. Therefore (and even by evidence in the text) God did NOT say after they had eaten that they had become "Like Us".

Aaaarrrrggghghhh!!! Again, god himself says that he's throwing them out of the garden lest they eat of the tree of life and become immortal like god. Immortality plus knowledge of good and evil > mere knowledge...

You're killing me, seriously.

And that is what you are basing your whole theory of God being "worried" on? Do you not think that if this was the case, God would have been "worried" beforehand? There is no evidence in the text of this whatsoever.

Bye. Keep up the good work, fellows. I'm done with this. Again.... Why oh why do I try?

It seems you are making wild inferences here man. I don't see anywhere in the Bible where God is indicated as becoming "worried" and the Bible specifically states the contrary SEVERAL times. As for the word "death" and it's meaning, this is reiterated in the New Testament, as death refers to the soul. Do you forget that people who ceased to live on Earth were referred to as being "asleep" by the same God?

 

[invert_nexus]

And you sir, cannot read, obviously. Have fun, say hi to god for me.

 

[§outh§tar]

And you sir, cannot read, obviously. Have fun, say hi to god for me.

He told me to tell you that He loves you.

 

[Neildo]

I don't see anywhere in the Bible where God is indicated as becoming "worried" and the Bible specifically states the contrary SEVERAL times.

God was worried once Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge in that they gained the knowledge of the gods. God did not want them to eat from the tree of life to become like one in that they have the knowledge of the gods as well as immortality. So before they could do so, he banished them from the Garden of Eden.

You are just taking the discussion in circles. The Bible speaks of man being created in God's image BEFORE they ate of the tree, NOT after. Therefore (and even by evidence in the text) God did NOT say after they had eaten that they had become "Like Us".

Creating man in God's image does not mean they're like God 100%. His creations did not have immortality or the knowledge of the gods. So basically only in appearance where they like the gods. And once Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, they become "more" like gods. And if they would have eaten from the tree of life, they would have sealed the deal and totally become gods.

- N

 

[Enigma'07]

God was worried once Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge in that they gained the knowledge of the gods. God did not want them to eat from the tree of life to become like one in that they have the knowledge of the gods as well as immortality. So before they could do so, he banished them from the Garden of Eden.

It was an act of mercy to prevent them from eternal life. If He allowed them to stay, they would be constntly hiding because they were ashamed of themselves.

 

[Joeman]

Questions still unanswered

1. If we are all inbreds of Adam and Eve, where do all the genetic variations come from?
2. How can an omnipotent being create flawed humans?
3. After God knew humans were flawed, why didn’t he create better humans? Why didn’t he just modify Adam and Even but instead go through the whole trouble with salvation?
4. Why didn’t God just kill Adam and Eve outright? You can argue God is merciful, but he has killed many for doing less during Old Testament time, and he has kill millions of humans.
5. Why did God curse other wild animals after Adam and Even have sinned? What the hell did they do?

 

[antifreeze]

1. mutations?
3. what was that whole flood thing about?
5. they were defecating in the garden of eden.

i really have no idea. just stabbing in the dark.

 

[SnakeLord]

It was an act of mercy to prevent them from eternal life. If He allowed them to stay, they would be constntly hiding because they were ashamed of themselves.

Wrong. They were ashamed of their nudity, not themselves. There is a big difference- Namely that once they had put fig leaves over their private parts, they didn't mind confronting god.

 

[§outh§tar]

they didn't mind confronting god.

That is a blatant lie.

Adam tried to pass the blame to Eve, who tried to pass the blame to the serpent.

Now unless you are going to somehow ignore that or twist that around to say they weren't ashamed of themselves.. ???

 

[SnakeLord]

That is a blatant lie.

What part is the blatant lie? Is it the part where I said they were ashamed of their nudity, the part where I said they used figleaves, or the part where I said they confronted god.

Please.. point out which part is a blatant lie.

Adam tried to pass the blame to Eve, who tried to pass the blame to the serpent.

Tried to pass the blame or... were being honest? Adam said that Eve had given him the fruit - which is true. Eve said the serpent tempted her - which is also true. Are you suggesting they should have lied to god instead?

Now unless you are going to somehow ignore that or twist that around to say they weren't ashamed of themselves.. ???

There's little need to. When people are ashamed of something, they usually lie. In this instance both Adam and Eve were totally honest with god and explained the events in straightforward manner. You can't ask for more than that. The only 'covering up' that they did was regarding their private parts. In that respect, yes.. they were ashamed, (as the bible says), but other than that they wouldn't be "constantly hiding because they were ashamed" as Enigma suggested on his post - which is actually what I was responding to. Their shame came from their nudity - which was quite easily solved by some fig leaves.

 

[§outh§tar]

@ SnakeLord

I don't want this to drag out so I will make this short, ok?

They failed to take responsibility for their actions but were looking for someone to pass the blame on to so that God wouldn't punish them.

If Billy and his brother Bob stole some candy and got caught and Billy during interrogation said Bob made him do it, it shows that Billy doesn't want to take the blame for it, if at all possible. Do you agree?

 

[Laser Eyes]

Questions still unanswered

1. If we are all inbreds of Adam and Eve, where do all the genetic variations come from?
2. How can an omnipotent being create flawed humans?
3. After God knew humans were flawed, why didn’t he create better humans? Why didn’t he just modify Adam and Even but instead go through the whole trouble with salvation?
4. Why didn’t God just kill Adam and Eve outright? You can argue God is merciful, but he has killed many for doing less during Old Testament time, and he has kill millions of humans.
5. Why did God curse other wild animals after Adam and Even have sinned? What the hell did they do?

1. God put all the genetic variations in Adam's loins. Over time as the human race grew these variations appeared.

2. God did not create flawed humans. Adam was perfect. Being a perfect man does not mean that Adam could not decide to disobey God. He had free will. When Adam disobeyed God he in effect damaged himself. We too have the ability to damage ourselves in a similar way. Have you ever seen someone start down a path of criminal conduct? Have you noticed how their personality changes? This imperfect analogy is similar to the way Adam damaged himself.

3. What do you mean "create better humans". Adam was perfect the way he was. There is no better human than the way Adam was created. If you change the creation then it isn't human anymore. You have something else, but not a human. The flaw was not in the design. The flaw was found to exist in Adam's lack of appreciation for what God had done for him.

How could God modify Adam and Eve to remove any chance of them disobeying him? The only way to do that is to remove their free will and that is something that God was never going to do. God wants us to love him and obey him voluntarily or not at all. He doesn' force people to obey him. That is a matter of choice. If Adam and Eve did not have free will then God would just be creating robots.

There may have been other ways of achieving God's purpose. He could have killed Adam and Eve immediately and created another man. But that would have been a hit and miss approach. The second man would have had free will just like Adam and there was no guarantee that the second man would obey God. This process could have gone on for some time until God found a man who obeyed him. It is not God's nature to do things in a disorganised manner. The God of this universe is a God of order and arrangement. The hit and miss approach of creating man after man after man until God finds a man who will obey him is not sure plan. Instead God came up with a plan that could not fail.

4. God did not kill Adam and Eve outright because he wanted them to give birth to other humans. God wanted the human family to expand. That couldn't happen if he killed Adam and Eve. It was part of God's plan for the world to become populated. God knew that there would be some humans who would be loyal to him. The new plan for achieving his pupose was salvation through a perfect man who would die an unnecessary death.

5. What are you talking about "curse other wild animals"?

 

[SVRP]

Again, thank you for your reply, Katazia, and excuse me if my responses to yours has come late (Fourth of July weekend celebrations).

Trust is a good thing and to choose that is a value judgment that requires a knowledge of good and evil.

According to whose standards in the knowledge of good and evil does one render that value judgment? Wouldn’t that standard be according to God’s? And if not God’s standard, what other standard would you use to judge with?

To trust or to distrust is a value judgment requiring the ability to appreciate what is good or bad. They would neither trust not distrust God since they had no way to make that decision.

But they were developing a relationship with God, and we all know relationships are built on trust. And we know God trusted Adam & Eve, otherwise He would have yanked out the tree if He didn’t.

Morality is a learned activity. A&E were created fully adult and did not proceed through a learning process as most children would do, and neither did God teach them about good and evil since that was the purpose of the tree and it seems he did not want then to have that knowledge, see Genesis 3:22

Just because they were not children does not mean they could not learn morality from God. Morality is a “do this & don’t do that” learning process. And they were learning the rules of the garden & God’s standard when He told them not to eat the fruit. But the serpent told them something else, and they disobeyed God.
Genesis 3:22 does not imply God didn’t want them to have that knowledge. It just says that they now know good & evil as God knows good & evil - the same standard. Again, this was a test of their obedience to God’s command & trust in God.

… we disobey some respected authority then we know we are doing wrong. This emphasizes the A&E issue. Since A&E did not know how to tell the difference between good and bad then they had no way to realize that disobeying God was wrong. And I state again it is grossly unfair for God to punish them for something they could not possibly understand.

And my argument is they understood that eating the fruit was something they knew they should not do. The emphasis of the A&E issue was whether they trusted God & obeyed His command. Prior knowledge of good & evil was not a factor to see how much they trusted God.

 

[duendy]

OK, this is what i have learned about the myth of The Garden of Eden.........the whole story has fascinated me from being very young...its imagery, and so on

right~~~~the 'two Trees' are REALLY one...(see J.Allegro's The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross)......the writers of myth, even patriarchal myth were kind of artists who used various means, transliterations, puns, secret borrowings of root words from other cultures, plagarizing others myths, ESPECIALLY the Goddess mythic symbiology..ie., the 'Garden', 'Tree', 'Serpent', 'Goddess (Eve', and her Lover 'Adam' etcetera

now the Tree secretly refers to the hallucinogenic mushroom. the Fruit of the tree. In Earth religions of the Goddess, ALL were allowed to partake of this fruit, and there would be orgiastic communal ecstatic ritual which would involve free expression, including erotic expression

THAt the patriarchs who wrote the myth sought to prohibit...BY, listen up--DEMONIZING the VERy symbols that held meaning for that world view of the immanent Goddess and her Son/Lover. are you with it? it was one of the first prohibitions or drug wars

An interesting thing i read....and if you are interested i can foreward you some websites that explain more about all this in depth....concerns a hebrew term "yetser". it means 'imagination'. Now, they had believed that their "God2 was a transcendental creator-god, yeah. and that only "HE" could imagine/create. as many of you who have experienced hallucinogens will be aware. they are the source of imaginative inspiration. But the writers of this myth saw that as a sin. that us, the god's likkle creatures must NOT imagine, particularly with the aid of hallucinogenic 'lest they become gods' fruit. ohhhh NO! 'God' says. we are not here to imagine. to do so is a sin against authority. ie., the male elect who srote the myth. who stole from other sources, especially Goddess earth religious imagery, so as to place us all in a collective straightjacket

 

[SnakeLord]

They failed to take responsibility for their actions but were looking for someone to pass the blame on to so that God wouldn't punish them.

That might be so, but at this stage they would be aware of good and evil and would realise the absolute futility of lying to god. Tell me, If you were confronted by god would you lie? Of course you wouldn't, so you would tell him that the serpent told you to.

Your Bob and Billy analogy is somewhat pointless if you do not take into consideration that the interrogator is god.

 

[what768]

If God would have put a guard around the Lifetree, we would still be like animals without conscious thinking.

 

[The Devil Inside]

people must remember something important: the torah was NOT written in english.
alot of misconceptions people have about that story are due to the limited scope of the english language.
1. the word for serpent in hebrew is "nachash". this can also mean "enchanter", or "witch doctor".

just food for thought.
food for thought tastes like delicious candy.