How did Adam and Eve know good from evil?

While I agree about being able to read it in a way that's about sex, do note, that the word "apple" never apears in genesis. It talks about "fruit" only.

Yeah, it's a common misconception, just thought I'd point it out to avoid the misconception from spreading.

Yep, you've said it all. I'll say once again that I agree it can be read in a "sexual" context. Yep. It's still very obvious it was a set up on god's part.

Then why was he all like "you're gonna die if you eat from that!". Which was a lie, because they didn't die when the ate from it. And don't say "But they did die! Just not immediately!". It's pretty clear the text means right away. They were always supposed to die, as is clear from 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

---

Exactly. Now, look at what god did. He put it in the room, told them he would spank them if they touched it. Let's in the neighbour, who tells them: "you won;t get spanked, you will have a lot of fun playing with that though!". And then when they touch it, he locks them out of the room instead of spanking them, proving the neighbour was right, and god wasn't. Then why does the text clearly say that they gained knowledge of good and evil as soon as they ate from the fruit, just like the serpent had told them? And it did. How nice of the snake to tell them. The snake is not satan. Adding to the text again, are we? Well Peg, better submit to your husband then, and don't you dare disagree with him! Is that really how you want to live your life? Better yet, is that how you live your life? You're disagreeing with me, and I'm a man! How dare you! I'll start gathering the stones, you just stay there, ok? Satan wasn't there.

That's not what the text says though. Are you adding your own beliefs to the text again? It was a joke, but that conclusion could be drawn from that text, and it has been drawn from that text. Couldn't find that in the text you quoted, does it say anywhere before or after it this is only in relation to teaching the congregations, or are you adding yet more of your personal beliefs to the text? Not according to the text you quoted. But I'll accept your explanation if you can show me that this is only in relation to teaching the congregation.

I never said that. I said that the snake told them they would gain knowledge of good and evil, knowledge that up until that point, apparently only god had. They did gain that knowledge after eating the fruit. The snake told the truth. BEcause they gained knowledge of good and evil, and apparently this knowledge makes you think being naked is bad. Did he? Would you mind showing me where he said that? I know he didn;t cover them up, that doesn;t mean he thinks it's good. Nope, that's pretty much what I asked. Thank you. It just shows how easily it is to add one's own interpretation to a text.

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.

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?

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.

Adding to the text again? I don't recall it ever saying animals died in Eden. Adam and Eve were bever meant to live forever. 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

---

According to the text, neither did Adam and Eve.

Would it help if Rrhain told you it was beetaratagang and I told you it was clerendipity?Because that's what happened to Adam adn Eve. One person told them it was bad, the other told them it was ok. Turns out the one who told them it was ok was telling the truth. They didn't die that day.

Quotemining scripture, are we? It says "on that day you will positively die.". They didn't die on that day, however. Furthermore, they were always meant to die, see Genesis 3:22, so if god didn't mean "on that day", which he did say, it wasn't much of a threat anyway, even if they would understand it. But that didn't happen, did it? They didn't die that day, the serpent told the truth.So again, would it help if Rrhain told you it was beetaratagang and I told you it was clerendipity? You'd have the same knowledge as Adam and Eve then. One person is telling you one thing, and another is saying the exact opposite.

First this: 1 year for man is 1 year for dog.Now, god didn't explain it to them very well, did he. How are Adam and Eve supposed to know this? This is a very weak appologetic.In one intance (creation) they are litteral 24 hour days, in the other (Adam and Eve dieing), it's suddenly 1000 years.Like I said, a very weak appologetic. {ABE}: If someone tells me "you will die on this day", I will not assume he means "in a thousand years". Not even if God told me, you should always explain things in terms the one you are explaining to understands. If he meant "within a thousand years", he should have said that.Edited by Huntard, : Added {ABE} bit

Also, one more thing. Adam and Eve were always meant to die, see Genesis 3:22. They did die before the thousand years were up, in short, god's threat amounts to: "If you eat from that tree, you will die on the moment you were going to die anyway". Yeah, great threat there, god!

Yes I''ve heard about dog years. It's the commonly quoted thing to say that when you multiply a dog's age by seven, you get it's "human" age. Which is stupid, since some digs get to be over 20 years of age (mostly the smaller kinds), which would make them older than 140 human years, which so far, no human has ever achieved.Also, this in no way means that dogs experience the passing of years any slower then humans do, which is waht you siad. My critique is that you change it around to conveniently fit whatever scenario you have thought up. In one instance it is claimed it's 24 hours, in another it's 1000 years. This is a very easy cop-out for you to take. If it meant 1000 years, it should have said 1000 years. {ABE}: Also, since you admit it can also mean the portion of the day when there is light, why do you think you get to determine god meant by what he said?Edited by Huntard, : Added {ABE} bit