A quesiton about the Tree of Knowledge, the Garden of Eden and Adam & Eve as "God's children"...

Question

Is it fair to compare God's decision to stick the Tree of Knowledge smack dab in the middle of his "children's" garden to a parent who decides to put an open bottle of bleach right in the middle of their children's play room?

And of course, each parent warns their young ones that they shouldn't touch what was just put within their reach... then each parent leaves their young ones to their own devices.

Is that a fair comparison?

P.S. I know A&E were "adults"... but were they not childlike in their innocence and their "newness" to the world?

DANG IT, I misspelled "question". Please forgive my typo and focus instead on actually answering the question. Thank you.

Jean, all I'm asking you is: is this a fair comparison? Yes or no. I don't need to be lectured on why God did what he did.

Answer 1

Extend your analogy: this is a parent who supposedly created his children from scratch, and gave them curiosity, a tendency for orneriness, and gullibility when tempted.

And still blames and punishes his creations when they behave according to the characteristics he instilled in them.

This paints a picture of a monomaniac. The sort of entity who would demand endless worship on pain of eternal torture.

CD

Answer 2

Not a fair comparison.

If you update the Utopian world of A&E to fit today's times, you could imagine a world without disease, where no person is hungry, suffering or homeless. Imagine if God actually appeared, granted all this and even provided every person or family a free home that cost nothing to maintain. What would happen? About 10 minutes after God was done, someone would say, "hey, how come that guy got the house with the really good view", people would start fighting, killing each other and complaining that God didn't care.

So I guess a fair comparison of God to parents would be if the parents did everything within their power to keep bleach from the kid but the kid breaks into the neighbors house, steals an ax, and then spends an hour smashing open the cabinet where the bleach is locked so he can drink it.

Answer 3

Yes I think it is a fair comparison to think this way. I myself am not sure that their is a being that is the creator of the universe. But , if there is then to put something like this in with his "children" and then tell them why they should not partake of it is just asking for trouble. Then too if the Jews and the CHristians are right God already knew they would eat of it and knew that the serpent would tempt them and knew the outcome of them being tempted. So if God already knew the outcome why would he put this into the garden in the first place. Also, while God is in the garden walking around calling out for Adam and Eve like he does not know hwere they are located does this throw the question of God being all knowing into question? Also, if all the gained was knowledge from this tree why does God have a problem with us his " creation" being educated or having knowledge? I think that this story like many others of the bible is a story that was hig-jacked byt he Jews from the Egpytians, Babaloyn, Ur, Sumer, Syrians, and the other peoples that populated this region of the world during this time. Most of all of these religions talk of a tree of knowledge and a tree that gives eternal life. The bible is merely a repackageing of the other ancient religions of the world at the time when it was conceived and put onto paypirus. Not sure if that answers your question but it does raise others.

Answer 4

You are comparing apples and oranges. They are not fair comparisons.
Placing the bottle of bleach out there for my five year old is not an act of love, but irresponsibility.
Yes, the presence of this tree gave Adam and Eve the opportunity to sin. But more importantly it gave them the opportunity to love. God gave them the whole garden to use and eat from. He only told them hands off with the tree. All they had to do was obey this one command to show their love for Him. But they knowingly chose to do wrong. They chose not to love God.
Without this choice they had no opportunity to love. Love without choice is slavery, not love. The tree had to be there for their expression of love.
Also, they did not have childlike innocence in this. They were informed of how wrong it was and chose to do wrong. While a child doesn't know how harmful the bleach can be, Adam and Eve knew full well.

Answer 5

I certainly understand what you mean, but no, that is not a fair comparison. First, bleach is inherently dangerous to drink. The fruit on the tree of the knowledge of good and bad was fruit - food.

Second, as you may have noticed, Eve did not seem to pay too much attention at all to the fruit of that tree until the serpent began to draw her eyes to it with his sly innuendos. Neither Adam nor Eve suffered any lack of food - indeed, they had plenty to satisfy their hunger and bring them delight.

Notably, the serpent approached Eve (the woman) and did so when her husband was NOT around. Interesting, huh? Moreover, the later Bible books that deal with this point out that Eve was thoroughly deceived but Adam was not. The serpent told her that she would be "like God." Eve therefore was reaching out for something to which she was not entitled. Adam, who knew full well that neither of them would ever be like God, went along because he did not want to lose this gorgeous woman who was his wife and brought him such happiness and pleasure. He did not even consider allowing God to handle the matter.

No, Eve was perfectly fine until she believed that eating the fruit would make her like God. Of course, she was terribly wrong and the serpent was terribly happy.

The fruit symbolized God's sole right - as creator and universal sovereign - to determine what is right and wrong - what is acceptable and unacceptable. We have no idea how long these two lived in the garden before they took this grossly improper step. The Bible does not say. But there is no comparison between the events in the garden and the event in your scenario.

Childlike in their innocence and newness to the world? Well, is it reasonable to believe that God would have given them an instruction they could not follow? They had no problem reproducing. They had no problem enjoying the pleasure of intimacy that marriage brings. So is it reasonable to believe that they could not follow the command to leave the fruit alone? No, of course not. It was very simple, really. Leave the tree alone. Even a five-year-old can understand that with a view toward obeying, yes?

Hannah J Paul

Answer 6

The opposite of innocence is guilt, not ignorance. The act resulted in assumption of guilt and a big loss of intelligence. Your analogy does not apply.

Today we have the little rule that says: "Ignorance is no excuse of the law." We have that rule because man is now ignorant, being separated from God. That rule did not apply in the Garden

To accept your idea of the condition of Adam and Eve, as modern day tellytubbies, one needs to argue that human intelligence is predicated on guilt!

The knowledge of good and evil has nothing to do with the ability to distinguish right from wrong. But it colors everything we are now. It is hard to distinguish today; because most, who have nothing to do with scripture, believe they are more intelligent than their predecessors.

Adam was a creative spirit long before he was fashioned into a body and the female principal removed from him. Even in the flesh he had the ability to name everything. Today It takes a world team of the best scientists to do the taxonomy that one man could handle by himself. People are so 'dull' today they sometimes have trouble coming up with names for their children and pets.

God spent time with his children daily and was not in need of oversight by children's services. Again I point to the problem of taking degraded mental conditions of modern man and making an effort to apply them to a real paradise.

Answer 7

Well here's the big difference the way I see it. Adam and Eve had no sin nature. At all. They were perfect. They had never even considered disobeying. So God really wasn't out of line in telling them not to touch something. He had no reason to believe they would. On the other hand, as sweet as little kids are, they are full of a sin nature already. It sounds bad to accuse a little kid of being sinful, but they are, just like the rest of us. And mamas know that, so they would never put something dangerous in their kids grasp and tell them not to touch it and leave. Well I guess some mothers might, but not good ones... Anyways, that's the "unfair" part as far as I can see.

Answer 8

that is a good one to ponder..i think it could be an accurate comparison, but not something like bleach, that is going to hurt them, with no benefits.. perhaps a video that is inappropriate for age but has a lot of educational possibilities.. were A&E told that the fruit would give them something good? or were they told just don't touch? i don't know alot about the christian take on things.

Answer 9

Your analogy is great. God wanted Adam and Eve to fall so he placed the tree within their sight and reach.

Why did he want them to fall? So there would actually be a human race. Why would he create a giant planet of plants and animals and than make only two people? So they could just sit and stare at each other for eternity?

If god knows everything he knew they would fall, which is why he provided a savior. That is how the plan works. Think about it. Why would God make a whole planet just so he can plant some trees and make two people? Then, why would he put the tree right in front of them?

Answer 10

Hi, I'm a student and teacher of the manuscripts. This question comes up alot.
It sounds as if you may think this tree has roots and is planted there where it cannot move. If thats right, then you are missing
a great deal of information.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, is Satan himself. He showed up in the Garden to beguile Eve, which means to "wholly seduce". She was innocent, yes, and thats why God told her and Adam not to even touch that tree. Why? This is why:
Satan showed up there in an attempt to pollute the pure line of lineage, that down the ages thru Eve, womb-to-womb, would come the Christ. Don't forget what the
war was all about: Satan wanted the throne and the position that was reserved for Christ. We are here in this flesh age to make an ultimate decision of who we would follow. The war is still ongoing........
When God told Eve not to even touch that tree - that word touch is "naga" and means to touch sexually, as when you lie with a woman in sexual intercourse.
Trees are often used to describe men or entities in Scripture; The Tree of Life is of course, Christ, though not come yet into
the flesh to walk among us.
Remember when the blind man was healed by Jesus, and he said as his sight was returning: "I see trees, as men, walking".
Oh yes, Eve was well-warned by God.
After the sin, the two tied fig leaves together to make what? Was it a mask to hide their faces because they ate fruit?
No, it was aprons to hide their private parts; those parts that participated in the sin they were so ashamed of.
God told Eve he would multiply her conception: he did: multiplied by 2, exactly.
Eve was pregnant with twins; one pregancy of two separate fathers. Abel was Adams son, but Cain was Satans Son. This was all the animosity between the brothers.
Where scripture says "Eve gave birth to Cain and then AGAIN bare his brother, Abel"; that word "again" is not in the manuscripts; instead, it says she "continued in her labor". What does it mean when you have one baby, and then your labor continues and you have a second baby?
Twins. The boys brought their offerings to God at the exact same time, because they reached the age of accountability at the exact same time: twins.
If you think this is bazaar, check out Genesis 5:1, where you find the complete geneology of Adam. You won't find Cain listed there, because Cain simply was not Adams son. This is not normally taught, I know, yet it is all but cemented in truth in the manuscripts.
Cain killed his brother and God placed a mark on him: Ever hear of the "mark of the beast"? This is the marks beginning, right here on Cain. The mark of his own father, the devil. Re-read Matthew 13:36, the parable of the tares of the field: who was the wicked one who sowed that bad seed?
the devil. Satan has children on this earth, and they are called "Kenites" in scripture.
They even made it thru the flood of Noah, and you find them alive and well and doing scribe work for the Tribe of Judah in 1chronicles 2:55.
I better not ramble on, but I want you to get two important points:
1. this is a rabbit hole that goes far deeper than most realize....
and,
2. If people are not taught this basic, vital
information so that they can build a strong foundation, then they will not be able to understand most of the rest of the Bible.
You cannot build truth onto a weak foundation. It won't stand. This is why so many people think there are inconsistancies and controveries in the Scriptures. No
foundation.

Answer 11

I just wanted to put a word in and say that I think Jan's comment was total fabrication. Ridiculous. My five year old kid is a better "teacher of the manuscripts."