Speedy Faraon
I’m reluctant to get into a debate with you because you are so reluctant to use your reasoning abilities, besides the fact that you have proven to be a faultfinder rather than a knowledge-seeker. I learned that much about you over on the H20 board. But, we’ll see if anything has changed about you.
: Where in the bible does it say that they had already eaten from this tree at least once?
Would you agree that if something is implied that it is as good as having been said? If you are the sort that insists that unless it said so directly, then we might as well end this discussion right now. It’s sort of like the “Star of Bethlehem” thread, where the person said that unless someone could show her where in the Bible it said that Satan was the real source of the “star” then she wouldn’t believe it was of Satan. Of course there is no one scripture that directly blames Satan for that “star”, but the same can be said for it being the doings of God either. However, such doesn’t mean that it can’t be determined who the true source was. When one considers all the facts surrounding the “star”, it becomes easy to determine its source. And so that’s sort of the way it is insofar as settling the question as to whether or not Adam and Eve had ever partook of the “tree of life”.
The thing about it, is that the “tree of life” was not placed way out near the fringes of the Garden so that the first human pair might overlook its being there. Instead, it was positioned in the middle of the Garden along with the other tree of consequence. That being the case, what was there to prevent Adam and Eve from partaking of it too? Particularly so, since God had told Adam that “every” (Ge 1:29: 2:16) tree in the Garden, with the exception of one, was to serve as food for them. This being the case, they were given authorization to eat of the “tree of life”. There absolutely is to be found no prohibition against eating from but a single tree, and that was the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad”.
Then you quoted Genesis 3:22, as follows:
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
Then you said this about that text:
: The words "to take ALSO from the tree of life and eat" indicate that humans had never eaten from the tree of life before.
No it doesn’t mean that at all … not in view of what we have already learned that God had previously told Adam. Remember? … God had given Adam permission to eat of “EVERY” tree in the Garden, except the one. In view of that fact we therefore need to scrutinize the words of Genesis 3:22 very carefully. When we do that, what do we find? Do we not see that an alternate way of understanding that text is for it to be saying that Adam must not be allowed to reach out his hand and to continue taking from the tree of life and eat, and live forever. Certainly, if one is looking for an inconsistency in the Bible he will find it. But by doing so that same person is stunting his knowledge, because he closes off his mind. In order to get at the truths of the Bible one must approach it as one big harmonious book.
: "and eat, and live forever" indicate that, just as they only needed to eat from the tree of good an evil once, they would need to eat from the tree of life only once in order to live forever.
That’s not necessarily correct, not at all. True, Adam only needed to partake of the one tree in order to prove his willingness to be disobey God’s law, but that fact in itself doesn’t have to dictate that one serving each of the tree of life would impart everlasting life to Adam and Eve. Even as we must eat regularly in order to maintain bodily strength and health, it seems reasonable and only to be expected that God would rejuvenate Adam and Eve’s bodies in order to ward off the aging process in a similar way, by the taking in regularly of what ever it takes (what ever it was that was in the fruit of the “tree of life”). What is so complicated about that? Why complicate it by making anything more out of it than what one needs to?
: Where in the bible does it say they both bore seedless fruit?
In my writings, which you have read, I had said: “Needless to say, they both bore seedless fruit.” And now here you go asking, “Where does it say that in the Bible?” I really can’t believe that you need help in seeing that. Have you not given this any thought at all? With regards to the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad” how many of those do you think there were in the Garden of Eden? Aren’t the Scriptures quite plain in that there was only one? Yes there was a “tree”, not “trees”. The same can be said for the “tree of life”. See Genesis 2:9. Also, is it not obvious that since there were at the time only two humans that one such “tree of life” would serve the needs of just the two of them.
: If the Jewish war god’s plan was to populate Earth with humans, and all had to eat from this fruit periodically, does it mean all humans would have to travel periodically to eat this fruit, just like Muslims travel to Mecca?
Once again, reasoning must me used. Afterall isn’t that why we are superior to the animals, is because we possess the ability to use our powers of reason. Is it unreasonable to assume that God would create other trees of life? Such is even indicated in the Revelation account. See chapter 22, verse 2.
: How often would humans have to eat this fruit in order to keep on living forever.
I guess at the first sign of a new wrinkle then one better head for the trees of life again. I don’t know, why don’t you ask God.
Friday
.
