How did Adam and Eve know good from evil?

Free-will in the biblical sense isnt just about choosing which fruit i feel like right now. It includes God because he installed laws into the universe. He has the right to impose these laws because he is the creator. So while he's given us laws, he's also given us the ability to decide to obey them....that is free-will.

I desire chocolate quite often...and there's nothing sexual about that.
Not all temptations are about sex.I was tempted to find out the sex of my next baby when i recently had an ultrasound... nothing to do with sex. im finding it really hard to follow your line of thought.They always had the mandate to reproduce offspring. It was given to them long before they ate from the tree. It was their responsibility to fill the earth with offspring...that requires reproductive organs that function. Genesis 1:27 tells us "And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.
28Further, God blessed them and God said to them: Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth well this is the point that i have been trying to make but obviously you are not seeing.They knew about good and bad because they were trusting in God at that time. God told them it would be bad and they believed him because he was their father/creator. They were dependent on him for knowledge and the knowledge they did have was the knowlege he provided them with.When they rejected his knowledge, they became independent and invented their own knowlege...this is why they suddenly decided that nakedness was bad and not good as it was previously.

In comparison to everything else, it is a funny coincidence to use such worth as desire and tempted, especially if you do not think it is about knowledge of sex/active sexuality they obtain. That was just a thought. No big deal.

quote:

---

They always had the mandate to reproduce offspring. It was given to them long before they ate from the tree. It was their responsibility to fill the earth with offspring...that requires reproductive organs that function.

---

Bingo! It was God's intention. And if we just look at the text, and do not add speculations into it, they did not have sex, they did not reproduce etc., but suddenly, just right away they were banished from the Garden of Eden they had sex with each other. It might be a coincidence, but that is a very naive and denying way of thinking.Logically, your explanation is not correct.A = Adam
E = Eve
X = good
M = evil
G = God
S = Snake
D = Disobeying
Z = Death/DieG creates A and E with the faculty of X and only X according to Genesis
Mathematically we can express A and E as:A(X) and E(X)G says if you ever do D it will result in Z because D = MThis can be expressed asif and only if
A(X) = D or E(X) = D
Where D = M, M => Z
Then D => ZHowever, A(X) or E(X) can never result in D, since the function does not include M and just because D = M and M = Z is not the same as D = Z ( Death is not neccesary a result of disobeying or evil).G creates S with faculty of M (we do not know wether the snake is also X)
S can be expressed asS(M)S talks with E and questions God's wordThis can be expressed as:E(X, S(M))Since S affects E opinion - S(M) is put into the function E(X).If E(X) < E(S(M) thenE(X, S(M)) = M = D => ZE affects A which we can express as:A(X, E(X2, S(M)))I differentiate between A's X and E's X since I assume their factors for X is different in som, maybe mundane, manners.if A(X) < A(E(X2, S(M))ThenA(X, E(X2, S(M)) = M = D => ZNow I have presented it to you as logical as I could with a tired mind (because of the time here in Denmark right now), but as you can see there is a paradox when we include the question wether God was fair or not when he punished them.We do not run into this paradox if we just think of it as a folklore, with the purpose of explaining puberty, childbirth, social structure etc. and that is why I do not understand your explanation since you sayG produce A and E with X
We express this asA(X, M) and E(X, M)You assume they have the variable M, and that is bad when we talk logic. Your explanation is therefore inconsistent.

This doesn't mean he thought them being naked was "very good". This probably refers to just the overall state of things, not particularly to their nakedness. Yes...That's what I meant. The passage you quoted could be easily used by people to say that women should: "STFU and get me a beer!". In fact, it has been used as such. That's what I meant to say here. In short, I am agreeing with you (scary, isn't it )Anyway, we have drifted again. It's clear the serpent was right, and god wasn't. Adam and eve didn't know who of the two told the truth, there was no way for them to know. Luckily, they trusted the one that did tell the truth, the serpent.

hard to know how you draw that conclusion, but whatever tickles your fancy.

Ok, I'll break it down for you: The serpent said they would gain knowledge of good and evil, they did.
God said they would die that day, they didn't.Conclusion: The serpent was right, god wasn't------ Adam and eve had no knowledge of good and evil (they only gained this after eating the fruit), so how were they to know who to trust. If you've got two people telling you two conflicting things, and you can't distinguish between good and evil, how are you to know which one to trust?------ The serpent told them they would gain knowledge of good and evil, and wouldn't die. This was what happened, ergo, the serpent told the truth. I find the truth something important, and so, I'm glad they chose the side of truth, instead of lies.------ So, no other comments then? You agree with the explanation?

not at allAlthough, for an account that can explain a lot about the world we live in today, your explanation contributes nothing to it.On the other hand, the bibles account of mankinds fall explains why we die, who the enemy of mankind is and how he operates, why human existence is so troublesom and why dependence on God is so beneficial.

It shows that god doesn't tell the truth, that's for sure. Maybe we shouldn't trust so much in people who say they speak for him. If even the man himself doesn't tell the truth, how can we trust others who say they know what he thinks? At the very best, they do know what he thinks, but seeing as he is not telling the truth, we still shouldn't trust them. No it doesn't. Adam and Eve were always meant to die, see Genesis 3:22:

quote:

---

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever

---

God, by telling lies, not the serpent, for telling the truth. Not my experience. So you can get lied to? Sorry, I'd rather trust something that tells the truth.

What passages do you get that from?Doesn't this mean that god had to "set them up" because he was incapable of giving them free will without establishing a law for them to disobey? And why would his intention be that they did not have free will?

Deut 30:19, 20 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have put life and death before you, the blessing and the curse; therefore choose life, that you as well as your descendants may live, by loving the LORD your God, by heeding his injunctions, and by holding fast to him; for that will mean life to you.

​

Revelation 22:17 "And the spirit and the bride keep on saying: Come! And let anyone hearing say: Come! And let anyone thirsting come; let anyone that wishes take life’s water free"in some way yes, but not in the sense that he 'set them up to fail', NO.He never wanted them to fail, and if he did, why is he offering salvation to mankind? If failure was his purpose, what is he saving mankind from? Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

SpamEdited by AdminSlev, : No reason given.

slevesque responds to me:

quote:

---

I don't think your analogy is correct since for it to be correct, you would have to identify which of Beetaratagang or clerendipity lead to eternal damnation and which to eternal life.

---

But that's just it. You don't know. You are incapable of knowing. Until you eat from the tree of knowledge, I could go on and on for days about what it means, but you would never understand.In the story, Adam and Eve were given a choice between good and evil. Because of their choice, all of creation was cursed. But in order for such a curse to be legitimate, it depends upon them understanding exactly what it was they were choosing. But since they hadn't eaten from the tree yet, there's no way they could have understood. "But god told them!" Yes. And? What does that mean? How are Adam and Eve supposed to know that they should listen to god when they don't understand what "good" means?Remember, Adam and Eve were sinning up a storm: They were naked and not ashamed. But god didn't seem to care about this since, as anybody with any sense can understand, they didn't know what they were doing. No, they're not stupid. They're innocent. They don't understand the implications of what they're doing and despite that, nobody gets upset.So why on earth is the tree of knowledge any different? Note, I'm not saying that there are no consequences for what they did. After all, there aren't any global effects from being naked. But understanding morality? That can have a profound effect upon people's behaviour and thus how they interact with the world.But even so, the act of eating from the tree is no different from the act of running around naked: Adam and Eve were innocent and incapable of comprehending what it was they were doing, no matter how much god sits them down and says, "Don't touch!" So when the serpent comes along and says that what god is saying isn't true, how on earth they supposed to know to ignore it? They don't know what good and evil are.So the same thing applies to you: Beetaratagang or clerendipity? There's no way for you to understand what they mean, and yet you are now forced to choose. What resources can you draw upon to guide you in your choice?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Peg responds to me:

quote:

---

no comment from you on the revelation verse and the accusation that the NWT is wrong?

---

Tit for tat, darling. You answer my question and then I'll answer yours.Beetaratagang or clerendipity?You're not stupid and you understand the consequences of your choice. So why are you hesitating?Beetaratagang or clerendipity?How many times do I have to ask you this simple question before you answer?Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Ok, in the same way God informed Adam and Eve of the bad consequences if they chose to eat, you tell me the consequences and then i can make the choice.

I guess a logical argument does not count here for Peg.