Thread: A Paradox.. Tree of knowledge.. What are your thoughts?

Here is my theory. The elders of the tribe needed/wished to maintain control, and the young bucks kept disobeying them and beating the elders with sticks. How could the elders respond? By inventing gods, and convincing the villagers that the gods spoke to the villagers through the elders "From god's lips to my ears." To make this work, it was important that the elders prove they were superior in moral ways. They were unable to do that, so their other choice was to prove that everyone else was inferior in moral ways - what better way than to have the villagers sinful and evil even before they were born, and only by being blessed by the elders could they hope to be sinless.

So... how can someone commit sin even before they were born? hmmmm.... Adam & Eve and Original Sin! A triumphant idea.

Originally Posted by Sunshine

According to the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve were put in the Garden of Eden to live and they were admonished not to eat from the 'tree of knowledge of good an evil.' They had no knowledge of good an evil until they ate from the tree. Therefore they couldn't have knowingly committed a wrong in disobeying God and eating from the Tree.

But they were still punished and expelled from the Garden for eating from the Tree at a time when they had no knowledge of good and evil. Original sin was incurred upon mankind for Adam and Eve doing something which they could not have known was wrong as they did not know right from wrong until they partook of the tree. So why were they/we punished?

This is kind of a paradox, IMO, and somewhat confounding as to the actions of God.

Even with no knowledge of good and evil, they still understood obedience. Underlines man's (well, woman's ) incapacity to be completely obedient/free of sin.

Originally Posted by Sunshine

According to the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve were put in the Garden of Eden to live and they were admonished not to eat from the 'tree of knowledge of good an evil.' They had no knowledge of good an evil until they ate from the tree. Therefore they couldn't have knowingly committed a wrong in disobeying God and eating from the Tree.

But they were still punished and expelled from the Garden for eating from the Tree at a time when they had no knowledge of good and evil. Original sin was incurred upon mankind for Adam and Eve doing something which they could not have known was wrong as they did not know right from wrong until they partook of the tree. So why were they/we punished?

This is kind of a paradox, IMO, and somewhat confounding as to the actions of God.

I think this is a story that tries to explain the separation of man from God. And it is not to be understood literally, but figuretively.

There was a transformation in the consciousness of man. The transformation involved the creation of the "self" or the ego, which by its nature separated man from God. Once the self came into existence, that self could then contemplate its own death, commit actions to benefit that self, at the demise of others, etc. And from this ALL sin arises.

Christ came to reconcile man to God. He gave us the way to do that. It involves the death of that very self created in Eden, so that God may once again live in mankind, through this instrument we call the brain. Yet, God cannot live in a brain that is run by this entity that thought created, that we call the self or ego. The self will not allow it, and the existence of the self is like a locked door. Afterall we each consider the "self" to be the "real" us. And who would want to kill that?? So, we don't even look.

All of the evil in this world comes from the actions of a self, pursuing pleasure and self interests. Meek people have a less strong ego, therefore the meek shall eventually inherit the earth. Pretty simple shit if you unclog your conditioned mind so you can look in freedom, without the burden and chains of tradition. And this understanding of Genesis was probably considered heretical by the early Church and they tried to insure it would not be passed on. They succeeded. But in the process they took the wrong path. The history of religion, or Christianity proves they took the wrong, orthodox path. No evil comes from the "right and correct" understanding and the practice thereof. If evil comes from the understanding, that understanding is false. Or as Christ said, you can determine what sort of tree it is, by the fruit it produces. Christianity and other religions that indulge in evil are producing bad fruit. The latest are of course the radical Muslims, who kill in the name of God. Bad fruit, which means the tree is diseased, unhealthy, and WRONG.

Originally Posted by clarkatticus

as an athiest,I can hardly credit the ancients with the intellectual capacity needed to entertain my own thoery, but here it is. Perhaps the Adam and Eve original sin was an allegory for the beginning of self awareness, that point in human evolution where man became aware of his place in nature, the world and his "differentness" from all other life. In any case, if there really is a god, he has a cosmic sense of humor.

Hah! & that puts a whole new slant on things.

Maybe I'll start a new topic? Do the Gods have a sense of humor? I think they must. But maybe that just makes me feel better.

Originally Posted by clarkatticus

as an athiest,I can hardly credit the ancients with the intellectual capacity needed to entertain my own thoery, but here it is. Perhaps the Adam and Eve original sin was an allegory for the beginning of self awareness, that point in human evolution where man became aware of his place in nature, the world and his "differentness" from all other life. In any case, if there really is a god, he has a cosmic sense of humor.

Actually it doesn't take intellectual capacity, IF intellectual capacity is dependent upon knowledge, stored as memory. But you are right when you say the event in the mythical Eden was the birth of self awareness, that arose with the creation of the "self". That actually occurred, and it can be proven by the reversal of that event. Which is possible, or I think so anyways. I think so only because I can see the ego or self as a creation of thought itself. Then that one thought miraculously assumed control of the organism. I don't know why, but I can see its creation in my own mind. I can see how its existence caused my own evil deeds, as I attempted to gratify that illusion in all manner of ways. I have been there and done that, as all of us have. Yet with that pleasure comes suffering. It is inescapable.

Originally Posted by Quinn

Hah! & that puts a whole new slant on things.

Maybe I'll start a new topic? Do the Gods have a sense of humor? I think they must. But maybe that just makes me feel better.

Sure God has a sense of humor! Just look at some of his creations! Only a comedian would have created some of what we see today.

Blue Doggy: The meek shall eventually inherit the earth.

I used to work with a Concordance while reading the Bible. I thought it was useful because sometimes the same words are used over & over, & sometimes, meaning really can be lost in translation. One thing I found interesting was in the choosing of the word 'meek.' In translating from the original Aramaic, (& then so on through the various languages to the more modern day English) they could have just as easily used another word (& had done so in other places). That word most closely resembles the modern day English word 'teachable.'

I enjoy reading the sacred words of religious thoughtviews of all of the religions I've encountered. I agree when you say understanding comes from abstraction & more importantly from application. The Tao Te Ching remains one of my favorites. It most closely expresses my desire to reconcile the heart with the mind, the 'lion lies down with the lamb.'

Originally Posted by Quinn

Blue Doggy: The meek shall eventually inherit the earth.

I used to work with a Concordance while reading the Bible. I thought it was useful because sometimes the same words are used over & over, & sometimes, meaning really can be lost in translation. One thing I found interesting was in the choosing of the word 'meek.' In translating from the original Aramaic, (& then so on through the various languages to the more modern day English) they could have just as easily used another word (& had done so in other places). That word most closely resembles the modern day English word 'teachable.'

I enjoy reading the sacred words of religious thoughtviews of all of the religions I've encountered. I agree when you say understanding comes from abstraction & more importantly from application. The Tao Te Ching remains one of my favorites. It most closely expresses my desire to reconcile the heart with the mind, the 'lion lies down with the lamb.'

Ah, "teachable" is even better! I have not read a sacred book in decades. Once I read the entire Bible, a lightbulb came on, and I threw that book away. No longer needed it. I got the message, so I hung up the phone. While I am certanly not religious in the organized sense, I don't lie, steal, kill, commit adultery, or any of the other things that create disorder. I have no desire to do so. Yet, I sure do not believe in the God that most Christians believe in. He is an invention, a God created in the image of man. Yet, I feel the existence of something, that one could call God in my own consciousness. He is there, when I am not there. Odd.

Originally Posted by Quinn

Blue Doggy: The meek shall eventually inherit the earth.

I used to work with a Concordance while reading the Bible. I thought it was useful because sometimes the same words are used over & over, & sometimes, meaning really can be lost in translation. One thing I found interesting was in the choosing of the word 'meek.' In translating from the original Aramaic, (& then so on through the various languages to the more modern day English) they could have just as easily used another word (& had done so in other places). That word most closely resembles the modern day English word 'teachable.'

I enjoy reading the sacred words of religious thoughtviews of all of the religions I've encountered. I agree when you say understanding comes from abstraction & more importantly from application. The Tao Te Ching remains one of my favorites. It most closely expresses my desire to reconcile the heart with the mind, the 'lion lies down with the lamb.'

Ah, a second response to your own post. I thought of the word "teachable" after I made my first post. I still agree that it is even more enlightening than "meek" although from my own level of understanding, they refer to the same thing. A highly self assured man can be taught little, as he is already full with his own self centered understanding. So, his cup has to be emptied somewhat to make room for a truer understanding. If his cup is emptied, then he becomes once again "teachable". The catch is, it is rare when this empty-ing ever occurs with man. The ego fights it. Oh yes, the ego is such a brat, and a creator of disorder and chaos. Yet to most of us, this ego is the "real you" So, we identify with it, accept it as the ultimate reality, and there ya go.

Disorder reigns in the world, created by this image thought has created, and which thought then worships in a manner of speaking. No hope for change in this scenerio. So we of our own accord doom ourselves and the world. We are the world, the micro is the macro here. This isn't really that difficult to understand, but for most impossible. The Self gets in the way, as the self is the ruler of our domain. But who wants to negate the self? To negate the self would be to let go of the self. Who will do it? Only a scant few. And those people never create an organized religion. Only the false create organized religion. And perhaps that explains of the horrors that have come from religion as we know it today.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

That is the story. You did not know that?

Nothing like punishing an entire family of animals because the force of evil that you allow to exist used their form to deceive someone.

I don't want to spread any blasphemous rumors, but I think that God's got a sick sense of humor, and when I die, I expect to find him laughing.
- Depeche Mode

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I think this is a story that tries to explain the separation of man from God. And it is not to be understood literally, but figuretively.

There was a transformation in the consciousness of man. The transformation involved the creation of the "self" or the ego, which by its nature separated man from God. Once the self came into existence, that self could then contemplate its own death, commit actions to benefit that self, at the demise of others, etc. And from this ALL sin arises.

Christ came to reconcile man to God. He gave us the way to do that. It involves the death of that very self created in Eden, so that God may once again live in mankind, through this instrument we call the brain. Yet, God cannot live in a brain that is run by this entity that thought created, that we call the self or ego. The self will not allow it, and the existence of the self is like a locked door. Afterall we each consider the "self" to be the "real" us. And who would want to kill that?? So, we don't even look.

All of the evil in this world comes from the actions of a self, pursuing pleasure and self interests. Meek people have a less strong ego, therefore the meek shall eventually inherit the earth. Pretty simple shit if you unclog your conditioned mind so you can look in freedom, without the burden and chains of tradition. And this understanding of Genesis was probably considered heretical by the early Church and they tried to insure it would not be passed on. They succeeded. But in the process they took the wrong path. The history of religion, or Christianity proves they took the wrong, orthodox path. No evil comes from the "right and correct" understanding and the practice thereof. If evil comes from the understanding, that understanding is false. Or as Christ said, you can determine what sort of tree it is, by the fruit it produces. Christianity and other religions that indulge in evil are producing bad fruit. The latest are of course the radical Muslims, who kill in the name of God. Bad fruit, which means the tree is diseased, unhealthy, and WRONG.

That statement sounds pretty literal to me. I'm glad I'm not meek because I don't want this piece of shit planet.

Originally Posted by CharlesDavenport

Even with no knowledge of good and evil, they still understood obedience. Underlines man's (well, woman's ) incapacity to be completely obedient/free of sin.

They may have understood 'obedience' but the didn't understand DISobedience, for which the consequence was death. How could they understand death when they never saw anyone dead? And, FYI, Eve was deceived. Adam was not. And so the Bible tells us that sin came into the world by the action of one MAN