I believe the bible to mostly be a conglomeration of folklore, fairytale, and gobbledy-gook. That said, I will try to comment on Ergo's comments on my post "So I Had One of Those Conversation..." He stated that simply obeying an order doesn't actually convey a knowledge of right or wrong, which I can agree with to a certain extent. But I think I need to stand by Eve having prior knowledge of "good" and "evil" by the following passage:
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree [was] good for food, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
Before Eve even touches or tries the fruit, she "saw that the tree was good for food." Neglecting god's instruction not to eat it, she therefore comes to the inferred conclusion that god is full of hooey, and disobeys him without a second thought. Also, the creative imaginings that led Adam earlier in genesis to name every creature god made, and also the naming of "woman," shows more cognitive function than a babe or any other animal.
Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof.
Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
I would also like to say it is interesting that god commanded them not to eat of the good and evil tree, but not the tree of life:
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
I had a prof in bible college (yes, I'll admit it, it was a horrible two years, but there I was) that said if they had eaten of the tree of life, they would have lived forever and been just like god, having eternal life AND knowledge of good and evil. I also heard a pastor once theorize that the tree of life was the basis for the long-fabled "fountain of youth" that Ponce de Leon was trying to find. I do find it interesting though, that as the only two named things in the OT besides man and woman are trees. Could this be some type of ancient patriarchal fable/simile? Man representing the tree of life form which woman sprang, the tree of knowledge of good and evil being woman, who actually causes man to fail in obeying his god? Hmm, I just thought of that part now, so it will require more thinking...
I also need to get back to Bill and his thoughts on "relativity," but lunch is coming to an end, so I will close for now... Oh, and congrat's to Kelly on eating ham :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment