The Two Trees - My Genesis Ponderings (page 2)

cedars

Hi james_woods..

To defend N.drew, to the best I can interpret her unique language - the act of gaining knowledge of good and bad was also the act of gaining human life (as we know it today). So, the two trees were the same in that sense - it gave Adam and Eve intelligent life - if not everlasting life.

Thanks, but I'm still not sure where inherited sin fits into the picture.

I was raised as a witness to look upon the forbidden fruit almost like the poisoned apple in snow white - but from re-reading Genesis over and over, it seems there was nothing at all nefarious about the fruit other than the fact that it was forbidden. So in what way did the human race become contaminated with sin, which was then passed down from generation to generation?

Cedars

palmtree67

The fact that they were driven from the garden BEFORE they could eat from the Tree of Life, suggests that they were already in a dying state before they disobeyed.

Had they already eaten from the Tree of Life, Jehovah driving them out of the garden would have been pointless, because they would have achieved immortality.

Therefore, they were already dying before they disobeyed. They were created as mortal and dying before they disobeyed.

Which begs the question: Who was the one who actually lied in this scenario?

N.drew

Genesis 2:9

to grow

Jah

God

and out

of the ground

every

tree

is pleasing

to the sight

and good

food

the tree

of life

the midst

of the garden

(here is where is says AND) but is it convincing? It does not convince me.

(and) the tree.... Notice it is one word not the usual two for the word "and"

of the knowledge

of good

and evil

and the tree http://concordances.org/hebrew/6086.htm

They are the same word. One was translated "tree" the other was translated "and the tree".

So the tree of life was described in Bible as the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. That's what I think. Please remember that the word of God becomes invalid with man's traditions (of understanding). I might be wrong. But the funny as hell thing is how do you KNOW I am wrong?

Wizard of Oz

I think it is simply the differences between Man and Woman.

Adam thought it wasn't good to eat, Eve thought it was.

We all receive our thought processes from the same source.

Eve thought independently from Adam, as it should be and is; even to this day.

Wizard of Oz

I think it is simply the differences between Man and Woman.

Adam thought it wasn't good to eat, Eve thought it was.

We all receive our thought processes from the same source.

Eve thought independently from Adam, as it should be and is; even to this day.

cedars

palmtree67 - thanks, but you're super-imposing something onto the text that isn't there. It doesn't say that Adam and Eve were in a dying state from the effects of the fruit or even before eating it - merely that they had become like God in knowing good and bad by partaking. From reading the verses, it appears that their banishment was to "cut them off" from the tree of life which, for all we know, they were already eating from regularly since it was not forbidden.

Cedars

cedars

N.drew - I'm really sorry, but as much as I try to concentrate on your words that makes no sense to me whatsoever. Can you try really hard to break it down and make it understandable?

Wizard of Oz - again, I'm really sorry but that doesn't really explain things for me.

Cedars

palmtree67

you're super-imposing something onto the text that isn't there. It doesn't say that Adam and Eve were in a dying state from the effects of the fruit

If you read my post again, you'll see that's not what I said.

They were not in a dying state because of eating the fruit. They were CREATED in a dying state. Obviously, or there would have been no need to prevent them from eating of the Tree of Life.

Eating of the Tree of Knowledge gave them just that.....KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge of something that Jehovah didn't want them to have, so he banished them from the garden BEFORE they could eat of the Tree of Life.

Why?

Londo111

Cedars,

Like you, before I awakened, I was chaffing at the straightjacket the Society had put me in regarding the Adam and Even story. I just could no longer believe this was a historical account. It read like a parable. And the Paul's words at Galatians 4:24 regarding the Abraham drama kept ringing in my mind, "These things are an allegory."

Philo, as well as some of the early Church Fathers, such as Origen, did not take Genesis account literally. I suspect that Ezra and other learned Jews did not either. I don't believe the Bible writers that redacted the Pentateuch together intended it to be taken literally.

I recommend reading, "The Language of God", which is a book about theistic evolution from a Christian perspective. This book also references what C.S. Lewis had to say about the Fall, so perhaps exploring his perspective too might be beneficial as well. I don't necessarily agree 100% with everything from either works, but it does offer a different viewpoint.

Upon reading the Pentateuch in the New Jerusalem Bible, along with the section notes and footnotes, Genesis finally is making more sense to me. While the Documentary Hypothesis might not be the full story as to how the Pentateuch came together, I think it is a nod in the right direction.

There are two Creation Accounts. There are two interwoven Flood stories. There are 3 stories of a Patriarch having their wife stolen by a ruler. The Cain genealogy has parallels with the Seth genealogy. Certain themes and archetypes permeate the Pentateuch, even the Old Testament in general: the younger sibling usurps the older. The number 70 comes up quite a bit! One could go on an on.

Personally, none of this precludes spiritual and moral lessons that are inspired by God, beneficial for teaching, reproving or setting things straight. I believe trying to force a historical reading onto something that was not meant to be historical has been very damaging to the faith of many.

cedars

palmtree67 - but the bible doesn't say they were in a dying state when they were created. I understand that may be your take on the verses, and obviously you are entitled to this assumption, but you will forgive me if I only focus on things that are actually there in print. The image is given of Adam and Eve having access to eternal life in paradisaic surroundings, with all conceivable fruit that they may need at their disposal - including the tree of life, which God reveals in chapter 2 allows them to live "indefinitely". They only stop living indefinitely when they are banished from the garden, which is for the sole stated purpose of keeping them away from the "tree of life".

Cedars

The Two Trees - My Genesis Ponderings

Share this