Joe W said:
This seems to contradict what you just said. It clearly says that Eve has gained the ability to know good from evil. Which is all the moral evaluation is. And since God says "become like one of us, knowing good from evil" I assume that God does not have a secular morality. No?
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." --Gen 3:22
I'm glad that you stated "seems to" in your response, because the sentences referenced, do not in any way suggest that Eve had gained the ability to know the difference between good from evil, because she only "personally" experienced separation from God and embarrassment. This is all that's referenced. Therefore, the only way she could have learned more about evil was by experiencing or observing it! Which, is exactly how the Hebrew word for "know" is defined (to experience/learn). It is also obvious that the term "knowledge" is defined in about the same way. Hence, it is clear that Genesis 3:22 is actually a figurative statement and not one which really means Adam/Eve knew all the good or evil that they might eventually come to understand.
Also, the authorized version of the bible does not use the word "knowing" in Genesis 3:22, it uses the words "to know." This may appear to be minor, but it isn't. There is a big difference between: to know something and knowing something. The changing of the words by some modern translations appears to show a lack of understandings related to the story and the ways of God. Hence, it should be understood that Adam/Eve would have learned about evil from the actions of their children, grandchildren's and maybe their own future actions. Where, they (descendants) would be the ones mostly affected (by evil) as time passed. But, the heart-ache they (Adam/Eve) would have suffered is overlooked by most. And, yes they probably suffered, as well, "knowing" that their actions (related to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) was the beginning of disobedience for the human race.
So, the reality of what's was going on here can be illustrated by the two trees in the midst of the garden. In Genesis 3:22-24, it is stated that God would need to block access to the tree of life. Because, if Adam/Eve were allowed to continue eating from this tree, they would live forever…This same concept is applied to the tree of knowledge of good (good actions) and evil (bad actions). Since, Adam/Eve only took from this tree once, the bad actions they would now know was limited (hiding and being afraid of their Creator and embarrassment). This is supported by Genesis 3:7-11. Here, God ties their embarrassment of being naked to the tree of knowledge. This is known as cause and effect. So, not being able to take from either tree again, Adam/Eve and their descendants would die and be unable to discern (properly) between all of what is good and what isn't…Thus, the humankind would need to be told (by God) what was good and what wasn't. Where, disobedience to these instructions would result in consequences. Thus, moral evaluations would not be needed and would be counter-productive without the proper guidance and understandings of what Godly morals are verses the morals of the ones choosing their own definitions.
Joe W said:
I think you are confusing ought with is. Knowing that you were commanded to do a thing is not the same as the knowledge that you ought to follow that command. Ought derive from imperatives of an internal goal, such as morality. Without morality as an internal goal - a moral compass, if you will -- Eve could not have a moral imperative to obedience. The Eden story strongly implies that she had no such moral compass - no understanding that of north (good) or south (evil) existed until she ate the fruit.
Sorry, but I'm not the one confused. Adam and Eve experienced many (not all) of the "good" that God created before taking from the forbidden tree. Yet, the most amazing was access to the tree of life! Where, if one would review Genesis chapters 1-3, the word "good" is referenced many times. Yet, in the same chapters, the word "evil" is used 4 times: two related to the tree in the midst of the garden, one related to "eyes being opened" and one "to know" good and evil. So, to suggest that Adam/Eve were oblivious to the terms good and evil doesn't fit the narrative of the records.
When, God created Adam/Eve, free-will or choice was afforded to them. They could: obey God's commands and reap the benefits or disobey and suffer the consequences…It really is that simple. Yet, the counter approach presented: to reason or speculate psychologically (psychologize) is not part of the story or God's will…I see no reason at all to interject such a modern concept into this ancient event.
So, there really is a reason for obedience, which is to avoid the consequences for not doing so. Therefore, anything beyond this is just unproductive and useless.
Note: Even though I have used bible verses for support, this posting is my personal opinion and should only be understood in that context.