where did the fall come from?

[tomasortega]

where did the fall of man come from? were adam and eve created perfect? assuming they were, how could their actions be imperfect?? how can imperfection come from perfection??

and what was the result? they were perfect, then they ate from the tree of knowledge which added knowledge to perfection, and then god kept them from eating from the tree of life which added mortality to the mix.......

so the end result is, perfect yet mortal human beings with knowledge of good and evil..... i dont see the fall....

christians say though god initially created us perfect, we are now imperfect and born in sin. again, how? where did that kick in?

does mortality take away spiritual perfection? i dont see the connection

does knowledge take away spiritual perfection? again, i dont see how. knowledge is a characteristic of god. to say that it is something bad is to describe god as bad. god is also not imperfect or in sin despite knowledge.

 

[Zorro1227]

I have always wondered these same questions! This is why I feel like a lot of churches are "check your brain at the door" churches. A lot of times I have felt that for me to believe in this would cost me my intelligence.

 

[JustWondering]

If God created everything then he created sin and all that is evil. Logic would dictate God's hands are stained with sin and that he is at least partly evil. To refute that would contradict logic and common sense.

 

[3.14]

what if god intended us to remain neutral, with knowlegde you can't remain neutral, so he created mortality to get rid of the knowlegde

 

[Dunemeister]

It's unclear to me what perfection has to do with anything. I'm not even sure what that term would mean. Adam and Eve were created innocent. Thus they had, at least in the first instance, no desire to rebel against God or any such thing. So why did they sin? Well, the relevant narrative has a tempter in it. Where did he (the serpent) come from? The text does not say. But the tempter deceived Adam and Eve with half-truths and got them to distrust God.

 

[JustWondering]

It's unclear to me what perfection has to do with anything. I'm not even sure what that term would mean. Adam and Eve were created innocent. Thus they had, at least in the first instance, no desire to rebel against God or any such thing. So why did they sin? Well, the relevant narrative has a tempter in it. Where did he (the serpent) come from? The text does not say. But the tempter deceived Adam and Eve with half-truths and got them to distrust God.

Please describe what you mean by sin.

 

[Dunemeister]

Please describe what you mean by sin.

In the context of the account of the fall in Genesis 3 - 5, sin is distrusting God.

 

[JustWondering]

In the context of the account of the fall in Genesis 3 - 5, sin is distrusting God.

I do not know your God. How can I distrust him?

 

[DadBurnett]

where did the fall of man come from? were adam and eve created perfect? assuming they were, how could their actions be imperfect?? how can imperfection come from perfection??

and what was the result? they were perfect, then they ate from the tree of knowledge which added knowledge to perfection, and then god kept them from eating from the tree of life which added mortality to the mix.......

so the end result is, perfect yet mortal human beings with knowledge of good and evil..... i dont see the fall....

christians say though god initially created us perfect, we are now imperfect and born in sin. again, how? where did that kick in?

does mortality take away spiritual perfection? i dont see the connection

does knowledge take away spiritual perfection? again, i dont see how. knowledge is a characteristic of god. to say that it is something bad is to describe god as bad. god is also not imperfect or in sin despite knowledge.

As a Christian, I have never considered Adam and Eve perfect. I don't finbd "perfect" or "perfection" used anywhere in the Genesis story. It does however say that God pronounced all of creation as being "good," and I find no reason to equate gooeness with perfection. I don't think we really understand the mind of God and therefore have, perhaps, entertained misp[erceptions about "the fall." If any of the Bible story is true, then that which we choose to call the fall must have served some good purpose that we still have not groked.

 

[s3v3n]

Without disputing outright what has preceded I bring the additional question to the discussion, in context adam and eve were said to be good (gen 3-5), lets set aside the issue of the "tempter or serpent" and the whole issue of who tempted whom....the apple was from "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" (theist please correct me if I am misquoting, or too far out of context I don't have a bible at hand), my question would be this.

If they were good, and had no knowledge of good or evil prior to eating the apple, then weren't they incapable of sin? Is not the single prerequesite for evil the will to do harm? Or put more in this context, the KNOWLEDGE of evil? If they possessed no knowledge of right from wrong, good from evil, were they not incapable of the capacity to form intent? As would be a child?

Just a question...seemed to fit with the theme... :areyoucra
S3V3N

 

[Dunemeister]

I do not know your God. How can I distrust him?

The question of the OP is where sin came from, assuming for the sake of argument the Judeo-Christian conception of God and the narrative of that God. Your question about the definition of sin was relevant, and I answered it. The fact that you think the definition is false has no bearing on the issue raised in the OP.

 

[tomasortega]

according to the bible adam and eve knew that they were not allowed to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. when the serpent asked eve "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" eve answered: "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

this implies that eve KNEW and understood that eating from the tree of knowledge WAS BAD. which means that she knew/could differentiate between good and evil before actually deciding to eat from the tree of knowledge which would provide her with this knowledge. so there was no need for the tree of knowledge in the first place... which means no fall and no need for repentance.

also the fact that eve was overwhelmed by her desires/urges/needs/weaknesses which lead to her disobedience, shows that she was in sin/imperfect in the first place. which means that THERE WAS NEVER A FALL OF MAN and that god created adam/eve and us the way we are. and therefore we are not responsible/in control/to blame.

 

[s3v3n]

according to the bible adam and eve knew that they were not allowed to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. when the serpent asked eve "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" eve answered: "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

this implies that eve KNEW and understood that eating from the tree of knowledge WAS BAD. which means that she knew/could differentiate between good and evil before actually deciding to eat from the tree of knowledge which would provide her with this knowledge. so there was no need for the tree of knowledge in the first place... which means no fall and no need for repentance.

also the fact that eve was overwhelmed by her desires/urges/needs/weaknesses which lead to her disobedience, shows that she was in sin/imperfect in the first place. which means that THERE WAS NEVER A FALL OF MAN and that god created adam/eve and us the way we are. and therefore we are not responsible/in control/to blame.

Okay I have to split the difference here. First, your point about that they already knew implies that they had to somehow know what bad was, ever tell a two year old not to eat sand? (the comparison is to innocence not to christianity...don't misread)....saying bad and understanding good and evil are two different things, so I think your point is valid....

As for the "Never was a fall" portion, how much text are you willing to debate to get your answer here? Are you talking only the KJ Bible, the catholic texts, or are you willing to go to the experts on the old testment and consult Judaism, which will tell you another story about a woman who came before Eve....who wouldn't bow and serve to him, and this is how Eve knew to serve Adam and her lord... you'd have to expand the framework of your thesis is all I mean.

S3V3N

 

[Zardoz]

according to the bible adam and eve knew that they were not allowed to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. when the serpent asked eve "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" eve answered: "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' ....

AH! Right there! Don't you see the error?

G-d did not say they must not touch it, only not eat of it's fruit. So of course the serpent pushed Eve against the tree, and she touched it and what do ya know...

She didn't die.

So the whole rest of the commandment was suspect, in her mind. Such happens when you make your own rules.

In truth, that tree's fruit was only temporarily off limits, it was made for them but only when they were ready. She wasn't ready.

 

[zenzero]

Friend tomasortega,

where did the fall come from?

Though it can be explained but not possible with the Bible as the background which is taken literally by its readers.
Personally the Bible is only symbolic starting with adam and eve who are symbolic of the arrival of humans through evolution. The human specie is special because it has a developed mind which *thinks* and at the same time humans have the natural ability to transcend the mind to merge with that universal energy labelled *god*.
This very mind and its innate ability to thinks leads to the *fall of man*.
The moment *the mind is made thoughtless then again the human is in the garden of eden, enjoying the fruits of existence.
Love & rgds

 

[tomasortega]

Okay I have to split the difference here. First, your point about that they already knew implies that they had to somehow know what bad was, ever tell a two year old not to eat sand? (the comparison is to innocence not to christianity...don't misread)....saying bad and understanding good and evil are two different things, so I think your point is valid....

S3V3N

so your point is that saying something is bad, and understanding something is bad are two separate things.

but in order for eve to say something was bad and that that something would result in death. she would have to first understand the meaning of bad and death. otherwise she would have no understanding of what she is talking about and therefore not have a conscience, understanding that going against god's command is bad. which would mean that she went against god's will without understanding wether it was bad or good and without understanding the consequences of her actions. and therefore just like an infant, couldnt be held responsible for her actions, since she did not have understanding/a conscience.

so either eve had a conscience/understanding of good and evil before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which would deem the tree of knowledge obsolete, or she did not have a conscience/understanding of good and evil before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which means she is not to be held accountable for "choosing" or acting on anything. either way, its a lose lose situation for christianity and their quest of blaming man for his own fall, in order to make room for repentance.

remember conscience is the inner sense of what is right or wrong. if eve did not know that eating from the tree was wrong, then she is not to be held accountable, and if she knew that it was wrong, then no tree was needed in the first place since knowledge was already a given. so which version would you like? your choice.

 

[DadBurnett]

Without disputing outright what has preceded I bring the additional question to the discussion, in context adam and eve were said to be good (gen 3-5), lets set aside the issue of the "tempter or serpent" and the whole issue of who tempted whom....the apple was from "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" (theist please correct me if I am misquoting, or too far out of context I don't have a bible at hand), my question would be this.

If they were good, and had no knowledge of good or evil prior to eating the apple, then weren't they incapable of sin? Is not the single prerequesite for evil the will to do harm? Or put more in this context, the KNOWLEDGE of evil? If they possessed no knowledge of right from wrong, good from evil, were they not incapable of the capacity to form intent? As would be a child?

Just a question...seemed to fit with the theme... :areyoucra
S3V3N

The only error I perceive in what you said was in identifying the forbidden fruit as an apple ...

 

[Dunemeister]

according to the bible adam and eve knew that they were not allowed to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. when the serpent asked eve "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" eve answered: "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

this implies that eve KNEW and understood that eating from the tree of knowledge WAS BAD. which means that she knew/could differentiate between good and evil before actually deciding to eat from the tree of knowledge which would provide her with this knowledge. so there was no need for the tree of knowledge in the first place... which means no fall and no need for repentance.

Let me take a stab at this. Eve knew that eating the fruit was forbidden. And she knew what the consequences were if she ate it. How does it follow from this that she knew how to discern for herself the difference between good and evil? After all, wasn't it God who told her what was forbidden and why? And wasn't she merely repeating that to the serpent (although she herself embellished the proscription by adding "niether shall you touch it")?

also the fact that eve was overwhelmed by her desires/urges/needs/weaknesses which lead to her disobedience, shows that she was in sin/imperfect in the first place. which means that THERE WAS NEVER A FALL OF MAN and that god created adam/eve and us the way we are. and therefore we are not responsible/in control/to blame.

Again, Eve was not perfect. God alone is perfect. Eve was created innocent. She was sinless in that she hadn't committed any sins, nor was the desire to sin part of her original constitution. The desire to sin had to be evoked, manufactured, manipulated into her. Although the narrative of the fall takes but a few verses to tell, there's no reason to think that the account is journalistic. The temptation may have taken years to bear fruit in sin. But whatever which way, the point of the story is that the serpent got Eve to distrust God, and Adam quickly followed suit. He accomplished this with trickery, half truths, and outright slander against God.

Certainly, one cannot use Genesis 3 - 5 to argue that there was no fall. The only way to make the story to do that is to use the same sort of trickery displayed by the serpent in the original story.

 

[arimoff]

I recommend reading this, it gives a good commentary on it.

Berei**** Torah Reading - Parshah with Rashi

 

[tomasortega]

Let me take a stab at this. Eve knew that eating the fruit was forbidden. And she knew what the consequences were if she ate it. How does it follow from this that she knew how to discern for herself the difference between good and evil? After all, wasn't it God who told her what was forbidden and why? And wasn't she merely repeating that to the serpent (although she herself embellished the proscription by adding "niether shall you touch it")?



Again, Eve was not perfect. God alone is perfect. Eve was created innocent. She was sinless in that she hadn't committed any sins, nor was the desire to sin part of her original constitution. The desire to sin had to be evoked, manufactured, manipulated into her. Although the narrative of the fall takes but a few verses to tell, there's no reason to think that the account is journalistic. The temptation may have taken years to bear fruit in sin. But whatever which way, the point of the story is that the serpent got Eve to distrust God, and Adam quickly followed suit. He accomplished this with trickery, half truths, and outright slander against God.

Certainly, one cannot use Genesis 3 - 5 to argue that there was no fall. The only way to make the story to do that is to use the same sort of trickery displayed by the serpent in the original story.

did eve understand bad? did eve understand that disobeying god by eating from the tree was BAD? if she did UNDERSTAND bad. then she could differentiate between bad and not bad... otherwise she would have no conscience.......And wasn't she merely repeating that to the serpent (although she herself embellished the proscription by adding "niether shall you touch it")? this shows us that she had an understanding that it was A BAD THING to eat from the fruit. she gave the serpent the consequence of "death" and even as you have pointed out added "neither shall you touch it". so she did have a conscience afterall. even if only on this decision alone, she did have an inner sense of right and wrong. and she made a conscious desicion to eat from the fruit which would qualify as "sin"......... the problem with this is that if she did have a conscience, then she wasnt innocent before eating from the tree either... sin can not come from innocence. unless some outside forces are pushing that innocent being unknowingly into sin. in which case that innocent being is not to be held accountable...... just like when an adult gives a litte child a gun and tells him/her its a toy, and the game is to point it towards another child and squeeze the trigger. IS THAT CHILD TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE? however, if that child reaches an understanding of death, grows a conscience and understands that shooting another child is a bad thing. then yes, that child is to be held accountable. the knowledge was there. now, please dont pull out the law book stating that in our society minors are still not fully held accountable etc. because we are talkin hypotheticals here. and im sure god doesnt give a rip about our laws.

so my question remains. did eve have a conscience and understanding of bad(even if only limited) before eating from the tree, or was she 100% ignorant/innocent? the first would mean that she was not fully ignorant/innocent and therefore there was never a fall of man from innocence to sin...... while the latter means that she was simply used like a tool. just like the child in my example, tricked into doing something without their understanding. in which case, just like that child, she is not responsible