Why did God create the tree of knowledge?

plindboe said:

A normal tree could have filled those needs. There was a reason for the tree being created, the question is what that reason was. The best answer is that he wanted to test Adam and Eve, but that doesn't really fit the omniscience idea.
Click to expand...
Of course unless we're tested and put in a situation of stress, we don't grow do we? So maybe it wasn't so much for God's benefit than ours? ... i.e., Adam and Eve's.
 
Iacchus said:
Of course unless we're tested and put in a situation of stress, we don't grow do we? So maybe it wasn't so much for God's benefit than ours? ... i.e., Adam and Eve's.
Click to expand...

Why would one need to ' grow ', if they were perfect in the first place..


The story is not about ' growing ' it is about ' falling '...


Hard to keep things straight, isn't it?
 
Radrook
So he wasn't a programmed automaton.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t follow. It could have been faulty programming.

God placed the tree in the Garden in order to give man an opportunity to demonstrate his appreciation for his creator by voluntarily being an obedient respectful son.
Click to expand...
Who had no frame of reference or knowledge of one or the other.

Ossai
 
The idea said:
That sounds rather childish. "I didn't ask to be born. Why should I have to go to school and learn how to read and write? I can just get a job as a baseball player."
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand. My point is that I didn't ask to be created, so why do I owe my "creator" worship? Your analogy isn't even close to what I'm saying here.
 
- I've been asking this same question for a long time.

- Briefly:

1. Why did God put the tree of knowledge in the garden in the first place?

Typical answer: Because He needed to give them free will.

Wrong, because: If God is a slave to external rules, then He is far from omnipotent. An omnipotent being should be able to provide us with free will without dooming us in the process.

Typical answer: Because He wanted to test A&E.

Wrong, because: God is supposed to be omniscient. He already knew they would fail if He tested them in such a way, with Satan tempting them and all. Why do it when He already knew it? Did He not trust His knowledge? There is no need for such a test, if God is omniscient.

2. Is God omniscient? If so, then didn't he already know what would happen if he placed the fruit there?

Typical answer: Yes, He is omniscient. He already knew what would happen, but He had to give them a choice...

Wrong, because: See above problem with omnipotence.

Typical answer: Yes, He is omniscient. He knew what would happen, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have been given the chance to obey God.

Wrong, because: If God knew it beforehand, and God is omniscient, then there could have been no other outcome. IF (big if) God has free will, then God could have chosen a boulder of knowledge instead of a tree with fruit, and Satan would have never been able to corrupt mankind. Any way you slice it, the tree was placed there for a reason, and the only reason possible was to provide a danger to mankind... unless the bible is wrong and someone else placed the tree there.

3. BEFORE Eve ate the fruit of knowledge, was she qualified to make any moral decisions? (If so, then what did the fruit of knowledge do for her at all?)

Typical answer: She knew the difference between right and wrong, since she spoke with God on a regular basis. The fruit was merely an example of what would happen if they disobeyed.

Wrong, because: That's not what the bible says. Anyhow, an explosion is an example of what would happen if they played with TNT, but that doesn't mean God had to let them experience it before they could learn about it. If she knew the difference between right and wrong, then there was no need to have the tree there in the first place, was there? Eating the fruit did nothing for them intellectually... they were fully capable of sin and wrongdoing even before the fruit was eaten, in contrast with the bible. Plus, if we assume they did actually know right from wrong and were in daily contact with God... what person in his right mind would ever disobey God? Even with Satan tempting you, would you so blatantly go against God's commandment if you really knew anything about God and the difference between right and wrong? This answer implies that the believer thinks Adam and Eve, although intelligent and aware of their options, are at the same time tremendously stupid and unable to guess what would happen if they disobeyed God.

Typical answer: It didn't matter if she knew it was wrong or not, she still disobeyed God, and that is enough reason to punish mankind.

Wrong, because: If she didn't know right from wrong, then obviously she didn't know disobeying God was the wrong thing to do. She was morally inadequate... she was unequipped to make such a decision. It was only after eating the fruit that she was supposedly knowledgeable about such things. Besides, Eve did not make such a decision on her own, anyhow, it took Satan to tempt her into it. Without Satan, Eve did not sin, ever. Who let Satan in? (Not Adam or Eve.)

4. If God is benevolent, then why did He not simply forgive A&E?

Typical answer: God did forgive A&E by not killing them outright.

Wrong, because: Actually, according to God, A&E were supposed to die that very day. They didn't, and therefore God was either wrong about a guess, or He lied outright (unless you're one of those people who like to argue that 'a day' in the bible is actually not a day, but instead a billion years or something similarly stupid). But in any case, simply not killing them is not equal to forgiveness. After all, God kicked them out of paradise, made them toil and work for survival, cursed Eve with labor pains, and cursed all of mankind with the burden of original sin. Does that sound like forgiveness to you? Forgiveness means you actually forgive someone, not exact a petty revenge that eventually entails the slaughter of your own son on earth in order to then change your mind ages later (sort of). What type of kind god demands such slaughter before He feels okay with forgiveness?

Typical answer: God is not benevolent. They got what they deserved.

Wrong, because: If God is not 100% good, then that means He is at least partially evil. How evil is God, and why would anyone want to worship someone as cruel, petty, and jealous as such a being?

5. If God needed for mankind to commit this sin in order to have free will, then what rules exist that mandate such a thing to God? Shouldn't God be able to create us with free will WITHOUT condemning us?

Typical answer: No coherent answer has ever been given to me for this question.
 
scribble said:


You are the most blasphemous Christian I've ever read!!

And you're still incapable of comprehending simple english. All these comments suggest is that God is a JEALOUS GOD. Surely even you who have never read the Holy Bible have heard that phrase.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, God is also a contradiction. In the bible, it says

1) God is jealous
2) God is love
but
3) Love is not jealous

Whoops.
 
plindboe said:


A normal tree could have filled those needs. There was a reason for the tree being created, the question is what that reason was. The best answer is that he wanted to test Adam and Eve, but that doesn't really fit the omniscience idea.
Click to expand...

I think it is funny how so often that christians, when faced with a tough question about god, resort to an answer that requires an impotent or otherwise fallible god. The "he wanted to test Adam and Eve" thing is a good example, but my favorite is, "Sometimes, in order to teach children a lesson, you have to let them make mistakes." For example, a good way to teach them to not touch a hot stove is to let them touch it once and burn their fingers, and they won't do it again.

That might be half relevent if god were human, but god is supposed to be omnipotent/omniscient. On the other hand, being omni-everything, god can teach us to not touch the stove without having to have us burn our fingers. Yet, he still lets us do it. Is he sadistic or what?

Watch out for the answers that limit God's omnipotence or omniscience. They show up all over the place.
 
This answer implies that the believer thinks Adam and Eve, although intelligent and aware of their options, are at the same time tremendously stupid and unable to guess what would happen if they disobeyed God.
Click to expand...

Not at all.
I do not assume that they were incapable of knowing consequences. Neither does the NT describe Adam that way since it tells us that he made the decision he made although he was not deceived. Which of course means that he knew Satan was lying and that God was telling him the truth.

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.


So why then did Adam choose to disobey?
This is a behavioral issue. Being a behavioral motivational issue means that it is within the parameters of the social sciences.
The social sciences distinguish themselves from the other sciences in one very special way--in the diversity of motives which can cause an identical behavior.
For example,

A man goes to the movies because he:

1. Is bored
2. Is angry and wants to be distracted
3. Is a fan of the actress starring in the film
4. Intends to rob a bank and needs a place to meet with his accomplice.
5. Is trying to hide from the police.
6. Is in mourning over death of relative and seeks distraction.
7. Is studying film-making and going to the movies is part of his assignment.
8. Owns the movie house and wants to inspect how the equipment is working.
9. Is lonely and hopes to meet someone.
10. Is a pickpocket seeking victims.
11. Simply wants to get away from the bedlam of house and kids.

This diversity of possible motives is what makes a definitive answer in reference to any particular behavior a probabilistic one.
In short, in the social sciences one is called upon to weigh all the factors which might have been influencing the person and choosing the motive most likely to have been the cause of the particular behavior.

In the natural sciences you put two and two together chemically and predictably can expect an explosion. Social science doesn/t work that way.
 
Diogenes said:

Why would one need to ' grow ', if they were perfect in the first place..

The story is not about ' growing ' it is about ' falling '...

Hard to keep things straight, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Well, I would go so far as to suggest they weren't perfect (obviously they weren't) because they weren't grounded in their understanding, just like so many so-called Christians today are not grounded in their understanding which, is why they fell to the earth. In fact they were probably terribly naive.
 
Iacchus said:
Well, I would go so far as to suggest they weren't perfect (obviously they weren't) because they weren't grounded in their understanding, just like so many so-called Christians today are not grounded in their understanding which, is why they fell to the earth. In fact they were probably terribly naive.
Click to expand...

Well then, suggest it to Radrook, or someone else who is telling this story...

So, what story book are you reading from? I thought we were talking about the Bible, and A&E's fall from grace ?

You are the one who changed it to some kind of ' growing ' experience ...

If that's your version, we might need another thread..
 
Diogenes said:

Well then, suggest it to Radrook, or someone else who is telling this story...

So, what story book are you reading from? I thought we were talking about the Bible, and A&E's fall from grace ?

You are the one who changed it to some kind of ' growing ' experience ...

If that's your version, we might need another thread..
Click to expand...
Well, I personally don't see how someone can just come into existence and then pretend like they've always been here. That would be like walking in the clouds with no ground under your feet. Hmm ...
 
Iacchus said:
Well, I would go so far as to suggest they weren't perfect (obviously they weren't) because they weren't grounded in their understanding, just like so many so-called Christians today are not grounded in their understanding which, is why they fell to the earth. In fact they were probably terribly naive.
Click to expand...

You have a different criterion for perfection than God does.



Deuteronomy 32:4
He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he.



Genesis 1:
27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning-the sixth day.


Ecclesiastes 7:29
This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes."


NIV
 
Not at all.
I do not assume that they were incapable of knowing consequences. Neither does the NT describe Adam that way since it tells us that he made the decision he made although he was not deceived. Which of course means that he knew Satan was lying and that God was telling him the truth.

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.


So why then did Adam choose to disobey?
This is a behavioral issue. Being a behavioral motivational issue means that it is within the parameters of the social sciences.
Click to expand...

- So Adam was rational, but Eve was stupid. :( I'm not sure that's what you're trying to say tho... I think you're trying to say that it wasn't Eve's fault for being tricked. If that's the case, then Eve bears no moral responsiblity for eating the fruit, and Adam bears all the responsibility for eating it.

- If he wasn't tricked, and he knew god's commandment, and he knew the serpent was lying, and he experienced god directly and knew full well the reprecussions of disobeying, then what could have possibly moved him to disobey the being he knew to be the omnipotent creator of the universe?

- A man who is standing next to a brick wall and watches his friend run headlong into it and knock himself out, and then tries it himself, is stupid. Christians in this day and age take great pleasure in noting how far humanity has fallen away from obeying god, and it's a big deal to them that we 'get back in line' with god... yet even to a far-right Christian, these commandments are taken on faith. Adam needed no faith, he saw god, spoke to god, and experienced god first hand! He MUST have been a buffoon.

- A god-created buffoon.
 
Diogenes said:


Uhhh.. Are we in the same thread?
Click to expand...

FYI:

This is the only correct response to nearly *any* Iacchus post, I've learned over the last couple of days he is either incapable of understanding a word you say, or so convinced he is a good little Sophist that it doesn't matter; every word he says he believes to be the cleverest nonsense ever.
 
scribble said:

FYI:

This is the only correct response to nearly *any* Iacchus post, I've learned over the last couple of days he is either incapable of understanding a word you say, or so convinced he is a good little Sophist that it doesn't matter; every word he says he believes to be the cleverest nonsense ever.
Click to expand...
It's funny, but it feels like nobody's addressing me when they're talking to me either. Could it be that we might have different ideas about things? Anyway, it's not important for me that you understand what I know. It's important that I understand what I know. Otherwise, what difference would it make? And to be honest, I could care less what you think ... not with all backbiting and ◊◊◊◊ that goes on around here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom