Okay, we know the penalty for disobedience - expulsion from the Garden and having to do sweat work and the labor of childbirth; but what were the consequences of actually ingesting the forbidden fruit?
The Forbidden Fruit
- Thread starter dadburnett
- Start date
- Status
A. Hamilton
here for a minute...catch me?
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
- Joined
- May 10, 2005
- Messages
- 5,329
- Reaction score
- 794
- Location
- Boca Raton - Mouth of the Rat
- Website
- beyondtourism.wordpress.com
The Bible tells us that God said, "In the day you eat the fruit, you shall surely die". (paraphrased)
Death, Scripturally speaking, means "Separation". So it does not necessarily mean that Adam and Eve were going to drop dead that day. It means that they would be separated from God -- which they were.
--Sean
You are right, of course. I’m currently writing about cause and effect with the slant being towards exploring why we are the way we are. I’m using the Genesis story as my foundation and I am deliberately trying to think/explore outside the box of familiar religious precepts (truths) I’ve been taught. So, I am seeking your perspectives.
The original sin, I think, was more about disobedience than eating a piece of fruit; accordingly the punishment and separation was a direct result of that disobedience. However, considering how it is described, this was no ordinary fruit. Apples come from apple trees, cherry trees produce cherries. According to its Creator, this was a different kind of tree … it was not lemon or fig or almond, it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. We know that trees produce after their own kind. This tree must have also done so; its fruit were imbued with knowledge, a specific kind of knowledge – the knowledge of good and evil. The ingestion of that knowledge was not without its own consequences.
If the whole exercise was only about obedience, God could just as well have said, don’t throw rocks, or don’t eat figs. There was more to it than that … God specifically forbade the acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil. They ate, took into themselves, that particular fruit , thereby introducing a new-mind set into their reality, the mind-set of judgment, the ego-centric need to perceive stuff in terms of good or bad, right or wrong and all of the variations of “good and evil.” Knowing what the outcome of adopting the serpent’s outlook (ways) would have on humanity, God forbade it. Never the less, they disobeyed and we continue to disobey, we continue to eat from the forbidden tree. We teach each new generation to adopt the forbidden paradigm, the mind-set of good and evil. The judgment of good and bad - the knowing of this as a way of life, is the root cause of all of our difficulties. This way of thinking is the cause of confrontation, conflict and war – wars within families, communities, religions and nations, and yes, within our self. As Paul said, we need to be transformed, to adopt a new mind-set.
Salvation, as usually perceived and experienced, does not of itself correct that mind set. It deals our disobedience, with the final judgment and eternal life. It does not, of itself, transform our adopted judgmental nature. And, even though Jesus told us not to judge, judgment is still our way of life, impacting every aspect of life. (Jesus did not instruct us to do anything that was not possible for us to do.) When the knowledge of good and evil was specifically forbidden by the Creator, why do we persist in it? Why do we persist in teaching it as a way of life to each succeeding generation?
Okay, that’s the direction I’m heading in …
The original sin, I think, was more about disobedience than eating a piece of fruit; accordingly the punishment and separation was a direct result of that disobedience. However, considering how it is described, this was no ordinary fruit. Apples come from apple trees, cherry trees produce cherries. According to its Creator, this was a different kind of tree … it was not lemon or fig or almond, it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. We know that trees produce after their own kind. This tree must have also done so; its fruit were imbued with knowledge, a specific kind of knowledge – the knowledge of good and evil. The ingestion of that knowledge was not without its own consequences.
If the whole exercise was only about obedience, God could just as well have said, don’t throw rocks, or don’t eat figs. There was more to it than that … God specifically forbade the acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil. They ate, took into themselves, that particular fruit , thereby introducing a new-mind set into their reality, the mind-set of judgment, the ego-centric need to perceive stuff in terms of good or bad, right or wrong and all of the variations of “good and evil.” Knowing what the outcome of adopting the serpent’s outlook (ways) would have on humanity, God forbade it. Never the less, they disobeyed and we continue to disobey, we continue to eat from the forbidden tree. We teach each new generation to adopt the forbidden paradigm, the mind-set of good and evil. The judgment of good and bad - the knowing of this as a way of life, is the root cause of all of our difficulties. This way of thinking is the cause of confrontation, conflict and war – wars within families, communities, religions and nations, and yes, within our self. As Paul said, we need to be transformed, to adopt a new mind-set.
Salvation, as usually perceived and experienced, does not of itself correct that mind set. It deals our disobedience, with the final judgment and eternal life. It does not, of itself, transform our adopted judgmental nature. And, even though Jesus told us not to judge, judgment is still our way of life, impacting every aspect of life. (Jesus did not instruct us to do anything that was not possible for us to do.) When the knowledge of good and evil was specifically forbidden by the Creator, why do we persist in it? Why do we persist in teaching it as a way of life to each succeeding generation?
Okay, that’s the direction I’m heading in …
sins of omission vs. sins of commission
"...For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil."
My opinion from what I've read, heard, and thought about ...
before Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying, they literally could not sin because they did not know what evil was. It didn't exist.(on Earth) Eden was perfect; they were perfect, all the animals and plants were perfect. Nothing died, nothing broke down ... There wasn't any sin on earth; it was paradise. (It used to be capitalized - Paradise)
Then I've heard people say, 'well how come the earth wouldn't have been overpopulated if nothing died ....'
Who said there was a need for procreation prior to the fall? Hmm? Adam and Eve didn't have kids til after. So I guess what I'm saying is Satan didn't lie exactly - they did know good and evil after - but Eve didn't know what evil was before she disobeyed. She sure did afterward, though.
So to try to exactly answer your question - humanity didn't have the ability to commit evil or sin prior to the disobedience; it didn't exist for them. After, they did.
"...For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil."
My opinion from what I've read, heard, and thought about ...
before Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying, they literally could not sin because they did not know what evil was. It didn't exist.(on Earth) Eden was perfect; they were perfect, all the animals and plants were perfect. Nothing died, nothing broke down ... There wasn't any sin on earth; it was paradise. (It used to be capitalized - Paradise)
Then I've heard people say, 'well how come the earth wouldn't have been overpopulated if nothing died ....'
Who said there was a need for procreation prior to the fall? Hmm? Adam and Eve didn't have kids til after. So I guess what I'm saying is Satan didn't lie exactly - they did know good and evil after - but Eve didn't know what evil was before she disobeyed. She sure did afterward, though.
So to try to exactly answer your question - humanity didn't have the ability to commit evil or sin prior to the disobedience; it didn't exist for them. After, they did.
Last edited:
I've often posed the same question. I've come to the (often berated) conclusion that as long as Adam and Eve didn't eat from the tree of knowledge, they'd never know right from wrong....and hence, it would be impossible to sin. Consider the two-year-old boy who finds a loaded gun on the coffee table, points it at his father and pulls the trigger, killing the man. He's no more guilty of murder than Jesus was.
Eating from the tree of knowledge (Just IMHO) gave humanity the burden of a conscience...and thus, the capacity to sin.
- Joined
- May 10, 2005
- Messages
- 5,329
- Reaction score
- 794
- Location
- Boca Raton - Mouth of the Rat
- Website
- beyondtourism.wordpress.com
I heard from a historical perspective outside the realm of religion/faith. Is that the eating of the tree represents the agricultural revolution and people started to settle down into towns and cities and stopped being hunters/gatherers.
One Scripture in particular comes to mind when I think about the question of teaching our kids right from wrong and thus continuing the disobedience of Humanity to God's first prohibition.
For as by one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, so then death passed upon all men, for all have sinned.
This was, I believe, the Apostle Paul's words. Paul talks in-depth throughout the NT about the nature of Sin, our sinful ways, and our automatic programming, through the original sin, to do wrong ourselves. The Bible makes it very clear that we have a sinful nature, a nature that is more interested in self than in others. The two great commandments that Jesus quoted in the Gospels, have to do with loving others. Whether those others are humans or God, we are commanded to go against our sinful nature and love others at our own expense. This flies in the face of human nature, and that is why we have to teach our children right from wrong. If we don't, they grow up loving Self more than God and more than others, and they will do anything they can to please Self. If this happens, God will still judge them according to His righteous standards. Like the Scripture says, "At the ignorance of these times, God winked at, but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent."
So if we have the ability to understand God's righteous commandments, and the ability to call upon His Son, yet we don't call upon Christ, the Bible is clear that we have disobeyed God and we cannot, no matter how innocent our minds are or how lacking we are in the knowledge of His Laws, end up with Him. And with the Bible saying, "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance," it is obvious to me that He does not want us to be lacking in knowledge about right versus wrong.
So the forbidden fruit, though it was not meant for Humanity to ingest, has poisoned our species so much that we've become addicted to it. Ask anyone who is addicted to a harmful substance, and they will tell you that stopping instantly from that drug can, in many cases, kill the addicted person. God knows that if we are not weaned off the drug of the Forbidden Fruit, in His time, we will be worse off than we are now.
This is why teaching our young ones the very knowledge that God originally had forbidden us is so important to our survival.
Like always, Dadburnett, your posts are very thought-provoking, and really make for good discussion.
--Sean
For as by one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, so then death passed upon all men, for all have sinned.
This was, I believe, the Apostle Paul's words. Paul talks in-depth throughout the NT about the nature of Sin, our sinful ways, and our automatic programming, through the original sin, to do wrong ourselves. The Bible makes it very clear that we have a sinful nature, a nature that is more interested in self than in others. The two great commandments that Jesus quoted in the Gospels, have to do with loving others. Whether those others are humans or God, we are commanded to go against our sinful nature and love others at our own expense. This flies in the face of human nature, and that is why we have to teach our children right from wrong. If we don't, they grow up loving Self more than God and more than others, and they will do anything they can to please Self. If this happens, God will still judge them according to His righteous standards. Like the Scripture says, "At the ignorance of these times, God winked at, but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent."
So if we have the ability to understand God's righteous commandments, and the ability to call upon His Son, yet we don't call upon Christ, the Bible is clear that we have disobeyed God and we cannot, no matter how innocent our minds are or how lacking we are in the knowledge of His Laws, end up with Him. And with the Bible saying, "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance," it is obvious to me that He does not want us to be lacking in knowledge about right versus wrong.
So the forbidden fruit, though it was not meant for Humanity to ingest, has poisoned our species so much that we've become addicted to it. Ask anyone who is addicted to a harmful substance, and they will tell you that stopping instantly from that drug can, in many cases, kill the addicted person. God knows that if we are not weaned off the drug of the Forbidden Fruit, in His time, we will be worse off than we are now.
This is why teaching our young ones the very knowledge that God originally had forbidden us is so important to our survival.
Like always, Dadburnett, your posts are very thought-provoking, and really make for good discussion.
--Sean
Well said Sean D. Schaffer!
Sincerely,
Gehanna
Thanks Gehanna.
I love threads like this, because they really get me thinking. --Sean
Most people think the serpent was a snake. In studying this subject, I find the serpent to be very much like man. He was "more subtil than any beast of the field." Gen:3-1.
Sex is often referred to as fruit. It seems that Eve could have done wrong, lustful things with the serpent to cause the fall of man. Satan used the serpent to be beguile Eve. It seems Adam was also involved "but not deceived" 1 Tim. 2:12-15. Sexual acts are much more likely to be associated with the "Tree Of Life" than fruit picked off a tree.
Some speculate that Cain was a by-product of this union. Cain's line is only mentioned to the 7th generation; whereas, Seth's linage includes Noah, and even more important, the second Adam, Jesus.
To me this accounts for the linage of Cain being destroyed in Noah's flood.
I could most certainly be wrong about how man fell. What matters is the fact that man did fall and Thank God we were all saved by Jesus. We were made sin by the first Adam and made righteous by the second Adam.
Praise God,
Jim
Sex is often referred to as fruit. It seems that Eve could have done wrong, lustful things with the serpent to cause the fall of man. Satan used the serpent to be beguile Eve. It seems Adam was also involved "but not deceived" 1 Tim. 2:12-15. Sexual acts are much more likely to be associated with the "Tree Of Life" than fruit picked off a tree.
Some speculate that Cain was a by-product of this union. Cain's line is only mentioned to the 7th generation; whereas, Seth's linage includes Noah, and even more important, the second Adam, Jesus.
To me this accounts for the linage of Cain being destroyed in Noah's flood.
I could most certainly be wrong about how man fell. What matters is the fact that man did fall and Thank God we were all saved by Jesus. We were made sin by the first Adam and made righteous by the second Adam.
Praise God,
Jim
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 2,139
- Reaction score
- 429
Hello Come Back Kid,
Genesis 4:1
And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.
I see no reason to speculate about Cain. The Bible makes it very clear how he was conceived.
Sincerely,
Gehanna
Genesis 4:1
And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.
I see no reason to speculate about Cain. The Bible makes it very clear how he was conceived.
Sincerely,
Gehanna
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2006
- Messages
- 4,672
- Reaction score
- 3,567
- Location
- Spurs Country
- Website
- www.jayyoungweb.com
Also, the story in Genesis describes land animals in three categories:
Beasts of the field
Wild animals
Creatures that crawl along the ground
Originally, the serpent is called the craftiest of the wild animals, but is later cursed and becomes one of the creatures that crawl along the ground, so it's like a reverse evolution. I also think the serpent is a type for Judas - not that it was actually Satan, but that it was used willingly by Satan. The Serpent's curse is also a great example of how God will talk to a person but simultaneously address the spirit behind the person (like in Isaiah).
Beasts of the field
Wild animals
Creatures that crawl along the ground
Originally, the serpent is called the craftiest of the wild animals, but is later cursed and becomes one of the creatures that crawl along the ground, so it's like a reverse evolution. I also think the serpent is a type for Judas - not that it was actually Satan, but that it was used willingly by Satan. The Serpent's curse is also a great example of how God will talk to a person but simultaneously address the spirit behind the person (like in Isaiah).
You mentioned thinking outside the box re the Genesis story, and that lead me to think of Irenaeus. Maybe his theology is commonly known, I don't know, but his take on the Garden of Eden story was "thinking outside the box" for me. I'm not an expert but, Irenaeus argued something like -- humans weren't strong enough to receive perfection at Adam and Eve stage, and so, their fall was less revolt than immaturity/vulnerability. I can't find a great link on this, but maybe this is a start. http://www.talkingphilosophy.org/ireneaus.html
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 6,817
- Reaction score
- 2,975
Hi db...I'm just thinking 'outloud' here since a thought occurred to me as I read this post.
Sin entered the world through the rebellious act of taking and biting into the fruit.
But if the Tree bore fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, then it seems its fruit would impart that knowledge, like you say.
So, maybe...the ingestion of the fruit gave humankind "conscience"...the ability to make moral judgments in the heart. This was not needed before, as there was nothing to compare good to. But now that sin had entered the equation, man would now need the conscience to judge what was good and what was bad. And we have rec'd this conscience along with our sin nature down through the generations.
(The Bible does say He's written His laws in our hearts.)
ETA: Just read back in the thread...and this is similar to rwam's post--except that I think man had the ability to sin BEFORE eating the fruit; because obviously, he did exert that choice.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 6,817
- Reaction score
- 2,975
Well, there's a problem with that...in that Evil was present prior to A & E's sin. It was Satan, who was around before he manifested himself in the Garden as the serpent. So, theoretically, Satan could have tempted A & E at ANY time after their creation.
Also, they could commit evil, even though they hadn't yet experienced it. That is what happened with the fruit.
Ah Pat! I was wondering when the pre-order presence of the Dark Lord would be mentioned. Clearly there was a created order prior to the formation of our world(s). It was in this realm that the Creator gave Lucifer ,the brilliant angel, dominion over creation. After his rebellion Lucifer was cast out of the divine Presence, however, no where in scripture is Lucifer's dominion over creation revoked. It was through this authority over the created world that Satan came to A&E.
Think for a moment of the Temptation of Jesus. Satan offers Jesus worlds present and future. Jesus does not dispute Satan's power over the earth to deliver these riches. Jesus doesn't say, begone you have no power here. He rebukes Satan for tempting the Lord his God.
Which brings us to the question so often asked, "Why does God let bad things happen to good people?" Well, quite simply until we see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, the Dark Lord will have sway over creation. He will pummel each of us with his power. After all, he is an angel. Therefore it is only through a serious and deep communion with the will of God (as we personally understand it) that we have any hope of resisting a being so powerful that he dared even to approach Jesus.
I hold one belief that has been repudiated by nearly everyone I know. I believe that God loves his creation beyond human measure and that when it is all over but the shouting, He will rescue his Bright Angel, His beloved steward.
C
Think for a moment of the Temptation of Jesus. Satan offers Jesus worlds present and future. Jesus does not dispute Satan's power over the earth to deliver these riches. Jesus doesn't say, begone you have no power here. He rebukes Satan for tempting the Lord his God.
Which brings us to the question so often asked, "Why does God let bad things happen to good people?" Well, quite simply until we see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, the Dark Lord will have sway over creation. He will pummel each of us with his power. After all, he is an angel. Therefore it is only through a serious and deep communion with the will of God (as we personally understand it) that we have any hope of resisting a being so powerful that he dared even to approach Jesus.
I hold one belief that has been repudiated by nearly everyone I know. I believe that God loves his creation beyond human measure and that when it is all over but the shouting, He will rescue his Bright Angel, His beloved steward.
C
I see where you're coming from Pat but I'll have to think about it more (esp. with a brain that's working properly)
Sin was around ... true. But was it actually on Earth? Satan was 'cast out' but where was he cast out to?
Eve was deceived. She disobeyed when she believed the serpent over what she had already been told by God - which was, 'Don't do this'.
Ordinarily I'd be more eloquent but I'm not able at the moment. Genesis isn't somewhere I hang out much - I can't rectify anything - all I can deal with is 'now' so I spend most of my time in the New Testament.
Sin was around ... true. But was it actually on Earth? Satan was 'cast out' but where was he cast out to?
Eve was deceived. She disobeyed when she believed the serpent over what she had already been told by God - which was, 'Don't do this'.
Ordinarily I'd be more eloquent but I'm not able at the moment. Genesis isn't somewhere I hang out much - I can't rectify anything - all I can deal with is 'now' so I spend most of my time in the New Testament.
ErylRavenwell
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 166
Did anyone notice the snake in the story? What was this snake doing in God's garden? And more important, why did God remain passive while the Snake set out to corrupt His creations? If He knew, then wouldn't that be a grand example of God's impotence? or perhaps indifference to human suffering? or is the Snake just another face of the same coin?
Last edited:
Sometimes parents see their children about to take an action they know is a mistake and allow them to make it anyway. It doesn't mean they were impotent to stop it nor does it mean they were indifferent to the suffering that may result.
God could have kept us innocent for all eternity, but he wanted us to choose to obey Him. But this choice necessarily included the possibility of choosing to disobey. He had a plan for that eventuality too -- Jesus Christ.
Granted, this analogy (like any analogy) is not perfect because human parents are not God. Right now, we see things through a mirror darkly because we literally cannot understand eternity.
Definitely a different viewpoint, and brings to mind a couple things. Though Lucifer may have had dominion over the earth at some point, I believe in the book of Job, he approaches God for permission/advice on whom to afflict (enter Job). Based on this, I'm not sure Lucifer has complete automony over mankind.
Here's a thought though. Is it okay to pray for Lucifer's salvation?
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 6,817
- Reaction score
- 2,975
I see where you're coming from Pat but I'll have to think about it more (esp. with a brain that's working properly)
Sin was around ... true. But was it actually on Earth? Satan was 'cast out' but where was he cast out to?
Eve was deceived. She disobeyed when she believed the serpent over what she had already been told by God - which was, 'Don't do this'.
Ordinarily I'd be more eloquent but I'm not able at the moment. Genesis isn't somewhere I hang out much - I can't rectify anything - all I can deal with is 'now' so I spend most of my time in the New Testament.
'Morning, Unique!
Yeah, Satan was cast out and given reign over the earth. I'll hunt down a reference...
ETA:
Revelation 12:7-9 War in heaven, Satan ("the dragon") cast down to earth with his angels
Luke 4:6 Satan reminds Jesus that he (Satan) was given authority over the world
John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11 Jesus calls him "Prince of this World"
Last edited:
- Status