Thread: some questions for Christians regarding the Adam and Eve story

I like the deep metaphoric meanings of this myth/parable. But I will wait for some Xians to post before I put my two cents in.

You're a hater of the word of god. May you eternally burn in hell for your sin.

Jk.. Some good questions posed..
Interesting...

Wish I had more to say on the subject. I haven't read the Bible but it's my understanding it holds a lot of symbolic wisdom. I look forward to seeing what others know of this subject.

I think the idea of "perfection" for this place wouldn't be ruined by a tree that's dangerous only to the two inhabitants whose capacity to understand the tree falls short of adequate...

I do not understand why Satan would be allowed to roam there either, though.

Not Christian.

I don't think there are any fundamentalist christians here nerve, so I don't think you'll get an answer from one of them. The ones who mosy on by usually get pissed off, go on rants and I end up banning them

Satan was allowed to roam around the garden because the story is one of the oldest in the religion. In early christianity, Satan was not an enemy of god, Satan was simply another entity, who had a dark side. In early christianity, Satan was more like a lawyer, who argued the sins of man to god.

I really hope a fundamentalist will answer those questions. Unfortunately, good questions are a stong repellant to fundamentalists, so there probably won't be any answers. It will be funny if Keeper, Jeremysr, Awaken4e1, or Noogah (I see a strong possibility that they are all the same person.) pops in here and announces that he will answer your questions after he finishes his current "project", only to vanish again for months or years and then come back with no acknowledgment that the questions ever existed.

I also want to know why tens of billions of people have to be punished for the fruit eating of two naked people in the woods of ancient Iraq. Are we all being punished for the actions of today's naked Iraqis in the woods? Also, what is the connection between somebody eating a forbidden fruit and the rule that people have to wear clothes? What a bizarre reaction.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I also want to know why tens of billions of people have to be punished for the fruit eating of two naked people in the woods of ancient Iraq.

Good question.


As I see it, it is a myth, or a parable, with many deep meanings.

1. Eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the loss of innocence. In this interpretation, the serpent represents the mind, with its delusions, interpreting perceptions rather than just pure perceiving, self-consciousness and ego, etc. that gives the illusion of separation from Nature, the Divine, etc. This is the difference between humans and other animals. Other animals may be ignorant, but they cannot so wrong or sin.

2. Another interpretation is that the Biblical God is a demiurge who does not want humans to know their own divinity. This is where the serpent was right. The serpent represents wisdom and the awakened kundalini. The serpent is the evolutionary force of consciousness.

I have heard that originally the fruit of knowledge was a pomegranate. It is also interesting that originally God made a woman for Adam whose name was Lillith, but she was not subservient to him and so God got rid of her and then he made Eve.

Actually UM, it's been presented that The Garden of Eden was actually Edin, which is present day Tabriz, Iran. Not Iraq.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Actually UM, it's been presented that The Garden of Eden was actually Edin, which is present day Tabriz, Iran. Not Iraq.

Opinions vary.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2000/PSCF3-00Hill.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...-of-eden_x.htm

http://www.newsflash.org/2004/02/tl/tl012404.htm

Also, is that all you have to say about the topic? I know you want to jump on the creation story a little bit. Come on. Give it a good bitch slap.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It will be funny if Keeper, Jeremysr, Awaken4e1, or Noogah (I see a strong possibility that they are all the same person)...

lmao I love how you think all these different groups of people are the same person

I do not take the Bible to be completely literal in all ways and on all subjects.

"What was Eve doing near The Tree by herself?"
Why wouldn't she be? Was she supposed to be beside her husband at all times?

Why would Adam let her go near it alone, OR, was she not planning to be, and curiosity got the better of her?
See above... also, I think she was curious. Satan is very tricky and one Speaker in my congregation once hypothesized: 'Imagine Eve walking through the garden and seeing the snake. He slithers up the tree and takes a bite from the fruit, then suddenly starts talking 'Is it true that God said you must not eat from any of the trees in the garden?' He could have drawn her in and when he claims that eating the fruit would make a person like God, she believed. None of the other snakes could talk....' I could see that (or something similar) having taken place.

Should Adam have felt any need to "protect" her from The Tree?
I imagine he thought she would obey and not eat from it. I don't think they weren't allowed NEAR it.

Would God have given Adam any reason for him to feel the need?
I have no idea. I don't know if they had a concept, at the time, of anything being "dangerous" per se, just allowed and not allowed.

Was the Garden of Eden supposed to be perfect?
Yes.

If so, how could The Garden be considered perfect if it contained a potentially "dangerous" tree?
The tree in and of itself was not dangerous.

Why was Satan in The Garden?
He was still an angel of God at the time. It wasn't until later that he rebelled completely and took 1/3 of the angels with him (they, thus, becoming known as demons).

If The Garden was supposed to be perfect, how could it be considered perfect if God permitted Satan to roam it?
See earlier answer

As to why billions have had to suffer....
God has myriads upon myriads of angels. Satan raised a valid point (and later another point): By his implying, to Adam and Eve that God was withholding something good from them, he questioned God's right to rule over his creation. And he gave Adam and Eve a choice: obey or disobey. By disobeying God, they said, in effect, that they would rather rule over themselves then listen to God.
So God has had to allow time to pass to prove that people cannot successfully govern themselves perfectly (the governments we now have may try their hardest to provide everything needed, but they're still limited by human imperfections).

God could have killed Adam and Eve but that would neither have answered nor solved anything (long term).

God provided the way out through Jesus Christ and knowledge through the Bible. 'This means everlasting life: their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ' (to paraphrase John, I think it is)
Though we have to put up with much and even suffer much in our lifetime, if we adhere to Bible principles and endure to the end applying those principles, we'll be rewarded with everlasting life in a perfect new world (perfected Earth, not Heaven).

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

I Was the Garden of Eden supposed to be perfect?
Yes.

If so, how could The Garden be considered perfect if it contained a potentially "dangerous" tree?
The tree in and of itself was not dangerous.

How was it not dangerous? The result of eating from it screwed up the world more than anything else in the history of the world, according to the story. It was more dangerous than any bomb or poison that has ever existed on this planet.

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

Why was Satan in The Garden?
He was still an angel of God at the time. It wasn't until later that he rebelled completely and took 1/3 of the angels with him (they, thus, becoming known as demons).

If The Garden was supposed to be perfect, how could it be considered perfect if God permitted Satan to roam it?
See earlier answer

If the angel that was about to tempt a couple to do something that would result in a world with so much tragedy, and that was about to do all kinds of other terrible things against humanity, was in the garden, the garden was not perfect.

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

As to why billions have had to suffer....
God has myriads upon myriads of angels. Satan raised a valid point (and later another point): By his implying, to Adam and Eve that God was withholding something good from them, he questioned God's right to rule over his creation. And he gave Adam and Eve a choice: obey or disobey. By disobeying God, they said, in effect, that they would rather rule over themselves then listen to God.
So God has had to allow time to pass to prove that people cannot successfully govern themselves perfectly (the governments we now have may try their hardest to provide everything needed, but they're still limited by human imperfections).

God, with his infinite power, could not have used a far more humane way of making the point? Also, couldn't God have made it where people can govern themselves perfectly?

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

God provided the way out through Jesus Christ and knowledge through the Bible. 'This means everlasting life: their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ' (to paraphrase John, I think it is)
Though we have to put up with much and even suffer much in our lifetime, if we adhere to Bible principles and endure to the end applying those principles, we'll be rewarded with everlasting life in a perfect new world (perfected Earth, not Heaven).

I would do a much better job with humanity if I were infinitely powerful. We would all be a bunch of happy campers forever, from the beginning of creation, and I would make it where there are absolutely no problems with that.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Also, is that all you have to say about the topic? I know you want to jump on the creation story a little bit. Come on. Give it a good bitch slap.

I already explained why Satan was in the garden, the above wasn't the only thing I said about Adam and Eve.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I already explained why Satan was in the garden, the above wasn't the only thing I said about Adam and Eve.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3002/...eb55c6bff4.jpg

What was Eve doing near The Tree by herself?
In the Bible, it never says Eve left Adam when the serpent was speaking to her. It's never indicated, so we cannot make any sure assumptions.

Why would Adam let her go near it alone, OR, was she not planning to be, and curiosity got the better of her?
Both of them might or might not have been together with the serpent. They were not that familiar with the garden that early, so they knew no better.

Should Adam have felt any need to "protect" her from The Tree?
Should, or did? I would think he did feel the need, considering God told him about the tree.

Would God have given Adam any reason for him to feel the need?
Would God? That refers to the future, right? I'll try to answer that if you rephrase it.

Was the Garden of Eden supposed to be perfect?
Define perfect.

If so, how could The Garden be considered perfect if it contained a potentially "dangerous" tree?
Why was Satan in The Garden?
If The Garden was supposed to be perfect, how could it be considered perfect if God permitted Satan to roam it?

I might get around to answering these later.

Originally Posted by nerve

lmao I love how you think all these different groups of people are the same person

Ha ha, yeah, I get skepical every time characters on the internet agree on strange stuff. But there is something especially odd about the parallels among the way creationists here debate. Maybe creationists are pretty much all just very much alike in the way they do that.

God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden to give Adam and Eve a choice to obey Him or disobey Him. Adam and Eve were free to do anything they wanted, except eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16-17, “And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 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.’” If God had not given Adam and Eve the choice, they would have essentially been robots, simply doing what they were programmed to do. God created Adam and Eve to be “free” beings, able to make decisions, able to choose between good and evil. In order for Adam and Eve to truly be free, they had to have a choice.

There was nothing essentially evil about the tree or the fruit of the tree. It is unlikely that eating the fruit truly gave Adam and Eve any further knowledge. It was the act of disobedience that opened Adam and Eve’s eyes to evil. Their sin of disobeying God brought sin and evil into the world and into their lives. Eating the fruit, as an act of disobedience against God, was what gave Adam and Eve knowledge of evil (Genesis 3:6-7).

God did not want Adam and Eve to sin. God knew ahead of time what the results of sin would be. God knew that Adam and Eve would sin and would thereby bring evil, suffering, and death into the world. Why, then, did God allow Satan to tempt Adam and Eve? God allowed Satan to tempt Adam and Eve to force them to make the choice. Adam and Eve chose, of their own free will, to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit. The results—evil, sin, suffering, sickness, and death—have plagued the world ever since. Adam and Eve's decision results in every person being born with a sin nature, a tendency to sin. Adam and Eve's decision is what ultimately required Jesus Christ to die on the cross and shed His blood on our behalf. Through faith in Christ, we can be free from sin's consequences, and ultimately free from sin itself.

Aww ... every time I see one of these threads, I'm expecting a great troll or flame war, and there's nothing here ...

Anyway, I'd love to see some of the great questions Richard Dawkins posed to be added to that list. But then it really would become a flame war, and they're probably not allowed here

Well, I have one good answer that pretty much covers all of your questions (bringing back their basis to the existence and then power/will of God), and it is:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

A quote from Epicurus. Doesn't answer your questions specifically, but it does answer them in general

Next, to the person above (PR0G4P4RV18) who tried to get out of answering questions with technicalities (you sneaky person, you ), I'm going to be more specific and write up what OP (probably) meant.

Should, or did? - I'd say assume should, because that was what was written, but either way they're both subjective.

Would God? That refers to the future, right? - Not necessarily, no. Would does not have a set tense. To rephrase it for you, anyway, try "Is there any potential reason that God might have decided to give Adam a need to protect Eve from the tree?"

To define perfect: being entirely without fault or defect. - Do not forget, for something to be perfect, it must then not be able to create anything with flaws or defects because it would not then be perfect.

And a few side notes: I am not a fundamentalist - if sufficient evidence or even possible evidence comes along that would suggest the plausible existence of God I would review my stance and beliefs, but until such a time, I will remain a non-believer. Also, if any of this is deemed to be too close to flaming (or encouraging such behaviour), at least give me a chance to edit it before banning me

If it isn't, I also have some more great questions for later, as well as a few answers to questions from theists.

Aww ... every time I see one of these threads, I'm expecting a great troll or flame war, and there's nothing here ...

Anyway, I'd love to see some of the great questions Richard Dawkins posed to be added to that list. But then it really would become a flame war, and they're probably not allowed here

Well, I have one good answer that pretty much covers all of your questions (bringing back their basis to the existence and then power/will of God), and it is:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

A quote from Epicurus. Doesn't answer your questions specifically, but it does answer them in general

Next, to the person above (PR0G4P4RV18) who tried to get out of answering questions with technicalities (you sneaky person, you ), I'm going to be more specific and write up what OP (probably) meant.

Should, or did? - I'd say assume should, because that was what was written, but either way they're both subjective.

Would God? That refers to the future, right? - Not necessarily, no. Would does not have a set tense. To rephrase it for you, anyway, try "Is there any potential reason that God might have decided to give Adam a need to protect Eve from the tree?"

To define perfect: being entirely without fault or defect. - Do not forget, for something to be perfect, it must then not be able to create anything with flaws or defects because it would not then be perfect.

And a few side notes: I am not a fundamentalist - if sufficient evidence or even possible evidence comes along that would suggest the plausible existence of God I would review my stance and beliefs, but until such a time, I will remain a non-believer. Also, if any of this is deemed to be too close to flaming (or encouraging such behaviour), at least give me a chance to edit it before banning me

If it isn't, I also have some more great questions for later, as well as a few answers to questions from theists.

hi nerve, as far as i know the meaphorical / allegorical idea behind the adam and eve story is that you have tro trust your god. adam and eve were blisfully happy in their nakedness until eve decided to eat of the tree of knowledge. thus making them both aware of their nakedness and feeling shame for the first time. i think satan was in the garden to represent mans free will. so basically its a story about obedience.

The best way I have for justifying God's actions is by seeing that God's Kingdom is *like* the governments we now have in place, by the laws and principles that any government sets forth for their citizens.
But God's government is in it for the long haul and so are it's citizens.

This is frustrating to explain because so many people now-a-days are rebellious and short-sighted (myself included else I would still be with my congregation and not smoking).

Does anyone remember Abraham? He wandered through many lands, sometimes settling down but he still called himself an "alien resident". Christians, likewise, are alien residents in the countries they live in. Governments make rules, God makes rules, when they clash, Christians obey God despite the consequences.

Everything I want to write comes across as conceited or patronizing or something so I'm going to come back when my headache goes away and I can think better :~

There IS a connection to all that I'm saying. I just can't find the right words or wording at this time...

Only thing i have to say is something my friend told to me. Why doesn't god just show that he exists. I know supposedly he isn't until like the appocalypse or something, but you know, if you want people to believe, the best proof is seeing. Ya know just puttin it out there.

What was Eve doing near The Tree by herself?
Who says she was alone?
Why would Adam let her go near it alone, OR, was she not planning to be, and curiosity got the better of her?
Are those the only options? Maybe Adam was tempted, too.
Should Adam have felt any need to "protect" her from The Tree?
Probably.
Would God have given Adam any reason for him to feel the need?
A conscience, you mean?
Was the Garden of Eden supposed to be perfect?
I don't think so. It was called good, but never perfect.
If so, how could The Garden be considered perfect if it contained a potentially "dangerous" tree?
Yeah, it wouldn't be.
Why was Satan in The Garden?
Who knows? I kind of reject the conventional idea of Satan, anyway. (Not saying I don't believe in him.) And where does the Torah ever say The Serpent was Satan?
If The Garden was supposed to be perfect, how could it be considered perfect if God permitted Satan to roam it?
Yeah, that would be weird. Unless it wasn't 'Satan' as we call him. It could have been the more Jewish concept of a challenger.

The Abrahamic religions are founded on misogyny and the Adam and Eve story is the justification for the destruction of the ancient, peaceful Goddess religions and subsequent enforcement of the belief that all women are inferior because they are the source of evil in the world.

See here.