How did Adam and Eve know good from evil?

Boy, you have been asking that question for a long time. I'll take clerendipity. What do I win?The interesting thing is that Eve didn't just blindly go for the apple. She made a reasoned decision based on what she knew.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

Dog years are not the same as human years, if you've never heard of 'dog years' then read up

---

Yes, please read Peg. A year is a year for a human or a dog. Since a dog's lifespan is shorter than the average human lifespan, a dog ages faster in the same amount of time. (Dog Years)A 1yr old dog is like a 15 yr old human. The comparison of dog yrs to human yrs deals with the aging process, not the passage of time. A year is still a year. A 1yr old dog is an adult. A 1yr old human is not.Which brings us to 2 Peter 3:8. Notice the word "like". This is a simile. The verse isn't saying that 1 day equals a thousand years. Big difference.The phrase was used to contrast the impatience of the mockers of the last days with the patience of God.Notice a day is "like" a thousand years. That means a day seems long. Then we have a thousand years is "like" a day. That tells us that a thousand years seems short.IOW, it might take another thousand years, or it might take a day. The point being that the end comes when God chooses, not man. Peter is assuring his audience that God was being patient and giving people the opportunity to repent and not to be taken in by the impatience of the mockers. The verse is not telling us that a thousand years pass by for us but only a day passes for God.This is another case of misunderstanding figurative writing. This verse has no bearing on the A&E story.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

dont take me out of context. My comment above was to your claim that english and hebrew grammar work the same way.

​

I said 'it doesnt work the same way'

---

Maybe you need to take a creative writing class to understand figurative language. Did you really not understand what Rrhain was saying concerning English and Hebrew grammar? In any language there are indicators that tell the reader to use a different meaning of a word. There are indicators that tell the reader whether the standard meaning of the word is used or a more figurative meaning is used, etc. I don't see how you can understand anything in the Bible if you have difficulty discerning literal or figurative usages. Doctrine doesn't determine how a word should be understood.

quote:

---

In the NT he is identified as the 'devil' AND 'satan' and they are the same thing. Devil means 'opposer' and Satan means 'resister. And im sorry to contradict you here, but those who first spoke about the devil WERE jews.

---

No they don't mean the same thing. Satan means adversary. As the word is used in the book of Job, it is personified and the character has the position in the divine court of prosecutor. The vision in Zechariah has the Satan character in the same job. A prosecutor does oppose the other side.Devil (diabolos) means prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely.An adversary isn't automatically a slanderer.In the OT the word translated as devil (shed) means demon, not adversary.Since neither the word satan or devil are used in Genesis 3:1, this issue is off topic and useless to the discussion.Serpent is the word used. Stick to what is written. The serpent is associated with wisdom in that verse.The Hebrew word arum isn't necessarily a negative term.I think using the word "subtle" is a poor choice today. That doesn't really tell me anything good or bad. The meanings crafty, shrewd, prudent, and sensible aren't necessarily negative. They all refer to wisdom.That makes Eve's choice even harder since the snake was portrayed as wise. There wasn't a reason for Eve to mistrust the snake. Remember, the snake did tell the truth.ABE: One issue you fail to address in Hebrew or English are the indicators. You can babble on about how Hebrew is different, etc. etc., etc.; but the bottom line is show us the indicators. You haven't addressed that issue.What indicators within the verses, whether Hebrew or English, indicate that yom or nachash are to be understood figuratively and not the standard meaning of the words?We have the same expression in Exodus 10:28, which was written by the JE writter as is Genesis 2:17. Now if we read the rest of Exodus we see that Moses did see Pharaoh's face again. Pharaoh's threat implied that if he saw Moses again he would kill him, not that Moses would just drop dead or eventually die of old age. I've made this comment before concerning muth. The implication from Pharaoh's threat and God's threat is that the person would be killed. Pharaoh chose not to kill Moses, just as God chose not to kill Adam and Eve.The implication in both cases is that death would be relatively quick and not natural. IMO, in both cases it was a scare tactic since neither of them carried out their threat.Oddly enough we still make the same type of threats today. Edited by purpledawn, : ABE

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

Yes, you can.

---

True, we are capable of imposing later thoughts, practices, and beliefs on earlier authors; but it is a dishonest and misleading practice.

quote:

---

Jesus did because he understood that the bible was written by one author for all mankind.

---

Depending on what scripture you are talking about, I don't feel Jesus did what you're doing. That also is probably another topic. You do have a way of dragging everything but the kitchen sink into a debate.Living forever is not the central theme of the Bible. Religions and beliefs evolve. You can't project backwards. To deduce whether A&E were meant to live forever, we have to stick to what is in the story. Since they would have only been able to live forever if they had eaten from the tree of life, that tells us their bodies were not designed to live forever on their own. Since God threatened to kill them if they ate from the tree of Knowledge, that tells us they were capable of dying. So they were not created to live forever and they were capable of being killed.Have you ever really read any ancient folklore or myths? Jim Henson did a good job with the "Storyteller" if you don't want to read. They aren't all sunshine and lollipops.The storytellers of the A&E story lived in harsh times. Although this story may have been considered a watered down version for their time. Just deal with the story on its own merits, Peg. Stop adding to it and imposing current beliefs and later concepts to it. If you're afraid to understand the stories as they are written, I'm not sure why you persist in these types of debates.Personally, I enjoy learning and I've learned quite a bit since joining EvC.Read the story Peg, don't rewrite it.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion