by BluesBrother 33 Replies latest watchtower bible
Lets face it, the Bible does not say and so any explanation is little more than speculation. Those of us here that believe the Bible has value can only reason on it as we see fit.
Personally, I do accept the Scripures but I do not see the need to take all of Genesis quite as literally as the WT does. May be it had a figurative meaning ?? But I dont lose any sleep over it.
There are literally hundreds of "creation" stories in all the cultures of the world. That this one happend to be recorded and was part of a nations' history recorded to justify its own behavior, does not make it any more authentic than the others. You might look into Tlinget legends about the Raven and how he created the world. Lots more fun reading and not any of the goofy evil crud.
carmel
It was put there by Him to have fun with his creation. kinda like pulling the wings off flys. How exciting would human history have been if Eve had ignored the serpent??
OK, Micheal. Although your thread title is about the 'tree of knowledge', you wound up talking about the 'tree of life'.
Please, if you would, take these questions back to the JW you remain in contact with:
This tree evidently had no intrinsic life-giving qualities in its fruit,
If this statement is so, then why did God make this statement:
"Now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,-
Also, please notice that the Genesis account says that the cherubs and flaming sword guard the way to the 'tree'. Why guard a tree that is purely symbolic and has 'no intrinsic life-giving qualities'. This doen't mean I believe in the tree having 'magical properties'; it just makes the account harder to accept as something more than an allegory.
Let's assume for a sec that Adam gets to the tree and eats. God says as quoted above that if he does, then he(Adam) will live to time indefinite. If that happens, then God's statement where he said that Adam would die is a lie. But God cannot lie. Crazy paradox here. Why tell Adam that he will positively die if there is an escape clause (if he makes it to the 'tree of life', he won't die)? And if God's word is true and the sentence for eating from the 'tree of knowledge' is death, why bother with the cherubs and sword to guard the tree. Jeez. Let him eat. What good will it do? Who's to say he hadn't already eaten from it. He had permission and both trees were in the 'middle of the garden'.
undoubtedly Adam would have been permitted to eat this fruit after proving faithful to a point that God considered satisfactory and sufficient.
To this comment, Gen 2:16: "From every tree of the garden you may eat..." and then it forbids the eating of the 'tree of knowledge' only. So-- Adam had permission to eat from the 'tree of life' initially. Who's to say he hadn't already eaten from it. Both trees were in the 'middle of the garden'.
One more statement within this account that bothers me:
Gen. 3:22--"Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad..." This statement is generally understood by JWs as God addressing Christ (pre-Messiah days). And the phrase 'knowing good and bad' as being able to decide for ourselves what is good and what is bad independently of God (please, someone correct me here if I have it wrong). So-how can this angel (who at this point in time is like any other angel; not immortal and has yet to prove himself thru an earthly test.) decide for himself what is 'good and what is bad' at this stage of his life. Why cannot other angels make this decision? I.E.-Satan.
I, like you, wondered about this also. Why would a God who supposedly gave his creations free will, set up a test, then punish Eve, whom the Bible clearly states WAS DECEIVED with eternal death? If God is just and loving, why would he impose the death sentence and the curse of painful childbirth for someone who was deceived (some use the arguement that it was Eve's imperfection that caused her pain, not a curse from God-but by whose standards was she considered to be imperfect)?If he was the only almighty God, why would there be any need for a test in the first place?Why did he not trust his creative abilities well enough to let Adam and Eve use their own judgement? If he truly had love for his creations and put them on the earth so that they could live forever in paradise with their families, and spread it over the entire earth, why did he change his mind? Why does he require exclusive devotion?
If he was truly concerned about his position and needing to have exclusive devotion, why didn't he just create people who were automotons, instead of telling Adam and Eve, "okay, I'm giving you the right to decide, but if you choose to not do as I ask, I'm going to end your life. Is that truly free will, or loving? It was a piece of fruit. True, he reportedly let them live out their greatly shortened lifespans, but what about the "millions who lives will be cut off at Armageddon?"
I've been researching the tree of life motif, and have learned that it is common to most societies.There is usually a test involved with tree motifs, but blind obedience is not usually required. Sure, some will argue that the other societies just copied it from the Bible account (they use that arguement for the flood, too), but many of the texts are actually older than the Bible (but then again Bible historians dispute that too).
Most societies view the tree of life as an allegory of the human condition. The trunk is seen as everyday life, the roots are viewed as the unconscious, the inner man, or the dark side of human nature (depending on the tradition), and the branches are viewed as the spiritual aspect.Fruit is generally seen as knowledge from or communion with the gods.Maybe the message in Genesis is an allegory that God wanted Adam and Eve to prove their loyalty to him alone, before he was willing to commune with them or impart any spiritual knowledge.
Personally, I'm waiting for God to explain it to me himself. If he takes offense because I'm genuinely confused, I guess I'm toast, like 2/3 of the world.
I did some research, and found that it was to represent Jehovah's ability to bestow everlasting life. Apparently, anyone who God allowed to eat from it, would be given everlasting life. The fruit itself had no life giving qualities. The reason for it's presence was a visible reminder to His creation that He was the giver of life and stood as a symbol of Jehovah's sovereignty. Until Satan rose the issue, it was never meant to be a means of temptation to Adam and Eve.You may want to wash the JWs answer before using it... whoever came up with it obviously pulled it straight out of their a$$.
Ask her this:
I have a baby. The baby is young. I have knowlege of good and bad. I want to:
A. Keep it from the baby and keep the baby dependent on me forever
B. Share it with the baby, and have faith that my child will grow into a just, loving being like myself.Afterall, I created the baby in my image.
Adam would have been permitted to eat this fruit after proving faithful to a point that God considered satisfactory and sufficient. When Adam transgressed, he was prevented from having opportunity to eat from the tree, Jehovah saying: "Now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,-." Then Jehovah followed his words with action. He would not allow one unworthy of life to live in the garden made for righteous persons and to eat of the tree of life.-Ge 3:22, 23.This just tells me that God created evil, and probably told Satan to test his creation. If he didn't know how tempting "knowledge" was, why play this game? If he hates evil so much, why allow it to infiltrate every part of creation, even before he began with Adam and Eve? A simple question? Why couldn't there have been ONLY good? Why create evil in the first place? Or let it fester and grow? To prove what? | ||
| Feb 24, 2004 | ||
A thought provoking question Micheal, something I have often wondered about too.
sorry I must have hit the button too soon ....... I enjoyed the comments of others, As has been said there isn't much else to go on except just what is written in those few verses, there seems to be quite a lot of scripture that appears to be confusing now that we are trying to understand it with our own brains, instead of the cult's teachings.
bttt
Twink
