Was Eve justified in eating of the tree of knowledge?

[Greatest I am]

Was Eve justified in eating of the tree of knowledge?

I know that most consider Eve disobeying God as what lead to the so called fall of man and some say the first sin.
First, since Satan was already cast from heaven and appeared in the garden as the talking snake, I would say that sin was already in existence before Eve ate of the tree of knowledge. Also, the evil tempting by Satan was also before she ate.
Further, the tree of knowledge contained the information of all sins and things evil so God must have known of these sins before hand. Jesus said that all one need do to sin is think about it. The thinking being more or less as bad as the sin itself.
If God is to be the epitome of all things then He would not only be the personification of good but also of evil. Perhaps this is why Christians can say that He is love while at the same time knowing that He is capable of great destruction/evil and genocide.
If Eve had not eaten of the tree of knowledge then man would be as morally bright as any of the lesser animals. This would not be good.
Without the knowledge of good and evil, it is impossible for mankind to form a moral sense.
I do not think that this would be God’s plan. To keep mankind ignorant of morals seems just to silly to contemplate.
Those who believe we fell from Eden must then believe that we are not to have moral sense. Please justify if possible.
Literal scripture says that God wanted obedience without question. As a moral leader, it is difficult to see why He would not want Eve to know, morally, why she was to follow. This would also not give her free will. Something some believe God gave us. I believe that freedom is taken, not given.
We can know that Eve did gain moral sense from the tree of knowledge because right after eating of it she hid and made to cover her nakedness.
Deuteronomy 32:4
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
To believe that Eve fell, we would have to wonder about the above quote. If God created Satan perfect and he somehow could thwart the perfection that God built into him then one can say that that perfection was imperfect because it did not remain so. The same would apply to Eve. Perfection cannot turn to imperfection because that would mean that God Himself might some day become imperfect.
If Eve was perfect then she would have made the perfect choice. Did She?
Should man have a moral sense?
Did God want to deny us a moral sense?
Did Eve do the right thing by reaching out for it?
If the snake was under Satan’s control then why punish it instead of Satan?
As In Job, was Satan just acting as God’s loyal opposition?
Why bring Satan to Eden and pit this supernatural deceiver of all men against a young innocent Eve. She would have no chance at defending herself?
The idea of a fall in Eden just does not want to wash for me. It would show God as a trickster and one who would deny mankind a moral sense. It would also show His perfect works as not worth much if Satan and then Eve and all of us can thwart this perfect programming so easily.

Thoughts.

Regards
DL

[Mister Agenda]

According to the story, Eve didn't know the difference between right and wrong until she bit the fruit, so she is entirely without blame.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Mister Agenda

According to the story, Eve didn't know the difference between right and wrong until she bit the fruit, so she is entirely without blame.

That is rather a large and inconveniently placed stumbling block isn't it?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

It's a silly story invented by Bronze Age goat herders while they sat around their camp fires at night. Analyzing is like trying to find deep meaning in Mother Goose.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

It's a silly story invented by Bronze Age goat herders while they sat around their camp fires at night. Analyzing is like trying to find deep meaning in Mother Goose.

I have to disagree, I think analysing it from an anthropological viewpoint can be an interesting exercise.

[laca]

Originally Posted by Darat

I have to disagree, I think analysing it from an anthropological viewpoint can be an interesting exercise.

Since Eve did not exist, I assume you mean analysing how people react to the Eve story...

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by laca

Since Eve did not exist, I assume you mean analysing how people react to the Eve story...

Don't. Just don't. That way lies madness.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Do you mean for real, or just in the Bible story?

~~ Paul

[Piscivore]

I find that even the question- particularly that silly little word "justified"- contains the ancient and quaint assuption that a human being must account to an authority for any and/or all its actions.

She acted, she experienced the consequences. There is no "justification" needed. The question is nonsense.

[Phase Inverter]

Originally Posted by laca

Originally Posted by Darat

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

It's a silly story invented by Bronze Age goat herders while they sat around their camp fires at night. Analyzing is like trying to find deep meaning in Mother Goose.

I have to disagree, I think analysing it from an anthropological viewpoint can be an interesting exercise.

Since Eve did not exist, I assume you mean analysing how people react to the Eve story...

I understood Darat to mean using the story to learn about the culture of the people that wrote it. The story being fiction would not detract from that endeavor.

[Robin]

You know I have always wondered whether that miller's daughter was justified in welching on her deal with Rumplestiltskin - after all they did have an agreement. Or was the miller's daughter making the agreement under duress?

[Fizzer]

Originally Posted by Greatest I am

First, since Satan was already cast from heaven and appeared in the garden as the talking snake, I would say that sin was already in existence before Eve ate of the tree of knowledge.

It appears as though Satan could come and go from earth to heaven at that point. See also the events in Job. Satan is not banished from heaven until after Jesus is resurrected.

Quote:

...
To believe that Eve fell, we would have to wonder about the above quote. If God created Satan perfect and he somehow could thwart the perfection that God built into him then one can say that that perfection was imperfect because it did not remain so. The same would apply to Eve. Perfection cannot turn to imperfection because that would mean that God Himself might some day become imperfect.

Could God not just remove the perfection from something?

Quote:

The idea of a fall in Eden just does not want to wash for me. It would show God as a trickster and one who would deny mankind a moral sense.

Then perhaps your assumption that moral sense came from eating the fruit is incorrect.

[Cainkane1]

Originally Posted by Mister Agenda

According to the story, Eve didn't know the difference between right and wrong until she bit the fruit, so she is entirely without blame.

In fact the person to blame is God himself. He created Eve innocent and allowed a walking , talking smart snake walk around the garden and even though god is supposed to be all knowing he failed to intervene when the innocent girl was tempted. God sat idly by while Adam did the same thing.

Allowing your worst enemy access to your creation is asking for trouble. The story is severely flawed. It never happened and its a poorly crafted myth. Its nonsense in fact.

[LightningStrike]

This is the version by the gnostics that points to a flaw in the creation. The flaw being that the god that created this place is flawed. However there is an intelligence greater than that god who presided over Adam and Eve and came to inform Eve of her reality.

The Serpent of Wisdom

The sin of Eve, so the orthodox tell us, was that she listened to the serpent, who persuaded her that the fruit of the tree would make her and Adam wise, without any deleterious side-effects. It was Eve who then seduced the righteously reluctant Adam to join her in this act of disobedience, and thus together they brought about the fall of humanity.

A Gnostic treatise, The Testimony of Truth, tells a different story. While repeating the words of the orthodox version of Genesis, the Gnostic source states that "the serpent was wiser than all the animals that were in Paradise." After extolling the wisdom of the serpent, the treatise casts serious aspersions on the creator: "What sort is he then, this God?" Then come some of the answers to the rhetorical question. The motive of the creator in punishing Adam was envy, for the creator envied Adam, who by eating the fruit would acquire knowledge (gnosis). Neither did the creator seem quite omniscient when he asked of Adam: "Where are you?" The creator has shown himself repeatedly to be "an envious slanderer," a jealous God, who inflicts cruel punishments on those who transgress his capricious orders and commandments. The treatise comments: "But these are the things he said (and did) to those who believe in him and serve him." The implication clearly presents itself that with a God like this, one needs no enemies.

Another treatise, The Hypostasis of the Archons, informs us that not only was Eve the emissary of the divine Sophia, but the serpent was similarly inspired by the same supernal wisdom. Sophia mystically entered the serpent, who thereby acquired the title of instructor. The instructor then taught Adam and Eve about their source, informing them that they were of high and holy origin and not mere slaves of the creator deity.

[Eyeron]

Eve wouldn't have had the opportunity for temptation if God hadn't put the tree in there.

[Pink Booties]

Tree of knowledge of good and evil, so they "could be as one of us"... I'd eat it, have gone right for it the moment his almighty back turned. God would have stamped me with FAIL and tried again.

[Safe-Keeper]

It has also been pointed out how it's a paradox it was that the snake could do a bad deed before bad deeds had been brought into the universe. Evil, after all, was apparently introduced only when Adam and Eve ate the apple, which should have meant it was impossible for the snake to do evil by tempting Eve, and impossible for Adam and Eve to sin by eating the apples without permission.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by Darat

I have to disagree, I think analysing it from an anthropological viewpoint can be an interesting exercise.

Disagree? DISAGREE!

Oh. Wait it's Darat. Hmm, you maybe right.

But the suggested approach applies to Mother Goose as well.

[Tricky]

Funny stuff moved here.

Posted By:Tricky

[boloboffin]

Originally Posted by Tricky

Funny stuff moved here.

Posted By:Tricky

You missed the part where the mother of us all ate from a metaphysical tree.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Tricky

Funny stuff moved here.

Posted By:Tricky

My post was entirely serious, and without humorous intent.

[Bella Mortis]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Eve wouldn't have had the opportunity for temptation if God hadn't put the tree in there.

This. If God had the knowledge and wanted no one to have it, why put it right smack dab in the middle of the garden and tell child-like people "now, don't eat this"? Obviously, there is no justification needed as far as Eve is concerned, since it was a trap. A nasty, mean, horrific trap set for a poor child, much like a pedophile offering candy.

[ddt]

Originally Posted by laca

Since Eve did not exist, I assume you mean analysing how people react to the Eve story...

They vehemently discuss it in a Synod:

Quote:

Since its founding in 1892, two groups have separated from the GKN. The first split was in 1926, over a conflict about the literal interpretation of the Bible. The orthodox majority of the church concluded from the story of Adam and Eve that the serpent had been given the power of speech. The members of the more liberal wing of the church viewed the story as an allegory. After the Synod of Assen concluded that the story in Genesis 3 was a report on a factual and observable reality, the Gereformeerde Kerken in Hersteld Verband ("Reformed Churches in Restored Union") were formed by the dissenters.

And I agree with those who say that words as "justified" or "blame" don't apply; after all, Eve didn't (yet) know right from wrong.

Moreover, it's a lose-lose game set up by YHWH: either you don't eat the apple and remain ignorant, or you eat the apple and you're driven from paradise and the rest of the inconveniences. It's another example of how the OT God is the greatest sadist ever described - or however Dawkins put it more eloquently.

[DC]

according to my sister, Lillith was the first one to sin. she always wanted to be on the upperside during sex.

[CriticalSock]

"The tree of knowledge of good and evil" How could it be anything other than heavy handed allegory??


If I remember the creation account correctly god says to his mates "Hey guys, I'm going to create these humans in my image and they're going to romp around on the earth and it's going to be cool."

Actually it was more like:

Gen1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them


BUT! god had the knowledge of good and evil already, so in order for Humans to be made in gods image they'd HAVE to eat the fruit and get the knowledge. That makes Snakeboy Satan a vital tool in gods creative process and Adam and Eve entirely blameless in carrying out gods will that they be like him.

[Pure_Argent]

Originally Posted by Greatest I Am

Jesus said that all one need do to sin is think about it. The thinking being more or less as bad as the sin itself.

Thoughtcrime!

Anyway. Yes, Eve was justified in eating the fruit. She couldn't know about sin until after the fact, so she couldn't have obeyed until she had disobeyed. So she was just trying to be good after all!

Of course, this assumes that she actually existed.

[DC]

where is the thoughtpolice when you need them?

[eccles]

If anyone here thinks there was an Adam and Eve and Genesis is fact, I have news for you. The Bible is the worst book of fiction ever written. Tear it up








Then put it in this bag then the trash.

Edited by Locknar:

Breach of Rule 10 removed.

Do not curse in your posts (Rule 10), this includes images.

Posted By:Locknar

[DC]

Hahaha

[laca]

Originally Posted by Phase Inverter

I understood Darat to mean using the story to learn about the culture of the people that wrote it. The story being fiction would not detract from that endeavor.

Yes, me too. Maybe I did not express myself clear enough.

[AdinDraco]

By coincidence (there is no coincidence!!! - sorry) I was listening today to a TechDiff podcast where God has to keep shooing Adam and Eve away from the tree. It was an hilarious skit where God kept trying to convince Adam and Eve to stay away from the unfenced, low-branched tree without them understanding a single point that he was trying to make...as they had not yet eaten the fruit.

[Starthinker]

I'll bet Eve was hot. Hot women can get away with anything.

[xXMoshtradamusXx]

Originally Posted by Cainkane1

In fact the person to blame is God himself. He created Eve innocent and allowed a walking , talking smart snake walk around the garden and even though god is supposed to be all knowing he failed to intervene when the innocent girl was tempted. God sat idly by while Adam did the same thing.

Allowing your worst enemy access to your creation is asking for trouble. The story is severely flawed. It never happened and its a poorly crafted myth. Its nonsense in fact.

Pretty much, it's Old Testament, it, by default, makes no sense whatsoever. (Not that I believe any of the Bible anyway) It's already a poorly constructed lie. Seriously I mean, God just happened to keep around a tree that housed all knowledge of Good and Evil? WHO DOES THAT?!

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by Starthinker

I'll bet Eve was hot. Hot women can get away with anything.

Prettiest girl in the World.

[Greatest I am]

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

It's a silly story invented by Bronze Age goat herders while they sat around their camp fires at night. Analyzing is like trying to find deep meaning in Mother Goose.

You are missing quite a lot of good moral messages if you ignore the messages within fairy tales. Too bad.

The Bibles also have some good moral lessons if you bother to look.

Back to sleep now.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fizzer

It appears as though Satan could come and go from earth to heaven at that point. See also the events in Job. Satan is not banished from heaven until after Jesus is resurrected.

Where is this said in scripture?
Why would God let Satan have access to His first prototype innocent and guillible girl child?

Quote:

Could God not just remove the perfection from something?

Who can say?


Then perhaps your assumption that moral sense came from eating the fruit is incorrect.

If so, then where else could it come from?

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Originally Posted by Cainkane1

In fact the person to blame is God himself. He created Eve innocent and allowed a walking , talking smart snake walk around the garden and even though god is supposed to be all knowing he failed to intervene when the innocent girl was tempted. God sat idly by while Adam did the same thing.

Allowing your worst enemy access to your creation is asking for trouble. The story is severely flawed. It never happened and its a poorly crafted myth. Its nonsense in fact.

Not if you recognize that man is supposed to have moral sense.

Think out of the box that the Church has created.
There interpretation is to enslave mankind.
The real interpretation is to free mankind.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Originally Posted by LightningStrike

This is the version by the gnostics that points to a flaw in the creation. The flaw being that the god that created this place is flawed. However there is an intelligence greater than that god who presided over Adam and Eve and came to inform Eve of her reality.

The Serpent of Wisdom

The sin of Eve, so the orthodox tell us, was that she listened to the serpent, who persuaded her that the fruit of the tree would make her and Adam wise, without any deleterious side-effects. It was Eve who then seduced the righteously reluctant Adam to join her in this act of disobedience, and thus together they brought about the fall of humanity.

A Gnostic treatise, The Testimony of Truth, tells a different story. While repeating the words of the orthodox version of Genesis, the Gnostic source states that "the serpent was wiser than all the animals that were in Paradise." After extolling the wisdom of the serpent, the treatise casts serious aspersions on the creator: "What sort is he then, this God?" Then come some of the answers to the rhetorical question. The motive of the creator in punishing Adam was envy, for the creator envied Adam, who by eating the fruit would acquire knowledge (gnosis). Neither did the creator seem quite omniscient when he asked of Adam: "Where are you?" The creator has shown himself repeatedly to be "an envious slanderer," a jealous God, who inflicts cruel punishments on those who transgress his capricious orders and commandments. The treatise comments: "But these are the things he said (and did) to those who believe in him and serve him." The implication clearly presents itself that with a God like this, one needs no enemies.

Another treatise, The Hypostasis of the Archons, informs us that not only was Eve the emissary of the divine Sophia, but the serpent was similarly inspired by the same supernal wisdom. Sophia mystically entered the serpent, who thereby acquired the title of instructor. The instructor then taught Adam and Eve about their source, informing them that they were of high and holy origin and not mere slaves of the creator deity.

Thanks for this.
There are many different versions of Genesis and A & E.
Please remember though that Gnostics do not read even their own scriptures literally.

As to the Christian version, I think it quite implausible that any God would deny man a moral sense.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Eve wouldn't have had the opportunity for temptation if God hadn't put the tree in there.

Exactly.

He wanted her to eat of it.
Some sins are justifiable.

2 Peter 3:9 KJ
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

You cannot repent if you do not sin. You also do not grow your moral sense.

Regards
DL

[RandFan]

The problem IMO, is how one defines "justified" and the state (tense) that it is used. Jack most certainly wasn't "justified" the moment he traded the cow for the beans but ultimatly he was.

It's a point of prespective. If the goal was to bring about humans and that could only happen if Eve ate the fruit then from the perspective of the greater picture then her actions were were justified even though her motives were not.

Was god justified?