The problem with the story is that we only have one version and one outcome and so have to make assumptions based on that. So what would have happened if Eve had rejected the snake or Adam had chosen not to eat the fruit? What if they had said sorry? What was God's long term plan?
Farkel may well be right and certainly his perspective on the issue is thought provoking and well thought out. Is there any alternative point of view?
In any home there are shared things and exclusive things. People are told that the things that are particularly precious must not be used by others that they belong exclusively to another person. Even children can respect this. The tree of knowledge was something precious that belonged to someone else. Adam and Eve weren't starving and there is no indication they had much interest in the tree until Eve talked to the serpent.
The tree didn't give Eve anything she didn't have already except guilt it was the first time she had made a mistake. Before eating from it she was able to reason on what was right or wrong otherwise she would have been unable to reason with the serpent in the first place.
Was the tree merely a symbol? Was God saying let me take care of you and help you, or you can choose to go it alone. If you chose me , I will help you and sustain you. If not then I cannot help you. It will be hard but you will have to make your own way in life. I don't know as the tale is probably allegorical it is academic.
Even if Adam and Eve had remained faithful what about their children? It would be unreasonable to expect that all of them would have been able to resist temptation.
Had God planned to allow them access to the exclusive trees in the garden after a time? Revelation talks about the tree of life being accessible.
I don't know the answers my old JW head wants to see a benevolent God greatly maligned but is this the case? This in no way answers the points Farkel and others have raised just asks people to also consider the what ifs as an academic exercise.
