You ask a very key question here. It is not that Adam and Eve were searching for knowledge, it was because they followed the Knowledge of Good and Evil instead of the Tree of Life. In this idilic garden, with full knowledge of God and His angels, Adam and Eve could not follow the Will of God. Now, this idilic place is guarded by Gods angels with flaming swords and humanity has no proof of God, but still must choose Jesus (The Tree of Life) over Satan (The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil). BTW, God gave Adam and Eve a second chance. Why not us and the angels?
Thanks, Shawn…I think my question, since part of a discussion with the lady from Canada, was more or less a challenge to the idea that the two wanted knowledge over God, as if one thing (God) is not knowledge or maybe He prefers “blind faith” over knowledge — a false dichotomy if ever there was one.
I think she would agree with me quite readily on that.
If “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” then it is hard for their act to be a search for knowledge at all…unless a very misguided one. But in the story, they are asked a couple questions that at least suggested to them that maybe God did not have their best interests at heart and maybe He wanted them ignorant and dependent so that He could maintain control.
So the search for knowledge seems, to me, a lesser reason for their disobedience. The greater reason for their disobedience is that they believed someone instead of God. They believed someone who wanted them to think God is a Meanie who was holding back on them. They actually (we know this, they probably did not) believed someone who really WAS holding back on them — in order to cause them and all subsequent humanity, great and potentially eternal harm.
In general, acts of rebellion come from some sort of disillusionment. Search for knowledge? You might (theoretically) throw it into the mix. But the real act was they disbelieved the knowledge that they did have — e.g., ability to name all the animals, access to everything in the Garden, daily fellowship face to face with the Creator of the Universe, keep away from that one tree’s fruits!! — and then they disobeyed God — in what seems, per the few details of the story, to be the only “restriction” laid upon them while in that Garden.
Of course, as we all know, this fits human nature. The one thing we cannot have … it suits us now!
I am not in agreement that humanity has no proof of God, and I would suspect that many in Biologos would say there is plenty. The universe at 13.7 B years is still way too young for all the complexity within it to have developed by some bumbling trial-and-error sense of “chance.” I understand that the emergence of the theory of the Big Bang offended the poop out of some who preferred that there never have been a beginning because a Beginning implied some moment of great intensity and planning by Someone somewhere outside of the universe itself… I began my exploration into the existence of God after lying beneath a sky filled with stars in the desert one night. Dry clear night sky in the desert air —uncluttered by city lights…it was not the first time, but on that occasion there was a “moment” ---- as the Bible says, “the heavens declare the glory of God.” Indeed they do…You and I only need to learn about how important some incidental things are to human existence – the location of certain nerves or etc in our bodies as opposed to them not being there at all, etc — for some sense of an Intelligence outside ourselves that had a hand in things.
OK…nuff said on that. But I do not think “no proof of God” exists when there are things such as I referred to…and certainly not when God became flesh and took upon Himself the sins of humankind — so that we ourselves can have forgiveness and not suffer the penalty ( which is eternal and, thus, by definition rather long term).
As for “God gave Adam and Eve a second chance. Why not us and the angels?” …there is a lot in that statement. Adam and Eve are mentioned very briefly in the Bible when mentioned at all, and then the biblical text is mostly silent. The fact that the text in Genesis does mention God making clothing for the two of them does suggest to some commentators that the clothes were the result of an animal sacrifice — no one made clothing out of synthetics in those days!! The system of animal sacrifice — which existed elsewhere in the world – is, in the Old Testament system, a “picture” of what was needed for the forgiveness of humanity’s sins — that is, someone had to die. “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins,” as it says in the New Testament. The shedding of blood that enabled Adam and Eve to be clothed was a “picture” of the system of sacrifices that came later in the Temple system in Jerusalem… and all of this was a “foreshadowing” of the sacrifice that God Himself would make on behalf of all humanity through the death of Jesus — remember “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world,” as John the Baptist said when he saw Jesus approach.
An animal’s sacrifice was a temporary covering of sins. But Christ’s sacrifice is an eternal covering for those who turn to Him and ask Him for forgiveness of their sins.
John’s hearers would have understood the symbolism in John’s remarks and not needed a sermonette.
So yes, God gave Adam and Eve a second chance, but it cost Him something…and they still had to live with the consequences of their actions — that is, no more Garden for them. Now he was going to have to grovel for a buck and make a living like all the rest of us — dealing with weeds and thorns and fertile soil and infertile soil and good crops and bad — and she with childbirth and bad hair days and all the rest of it.
As for “us and the angels” — you are talking about two different groups. We are not angels — at least not good ones (read the headlines for evidence of that !!)…There are angels who are already condemned to eternity in a lake of fire (boy are we off on a tangent from original question! happens all the time!!)…Their fate does not have to be ours. But we need forgiveness and that comes only through Jesus…“There is no other name given among men by which we may be saved”…
1 Like
What we have as humans is evidence of God, since we cannot see Him or His as Adam and Eve could in Paradise. They could see the flaming sword as they were cast out of the Garden, to fight for their life in the physical work as humans.
I am not following you down the rabbit hole.
Best wishes, Shawn
Rabbit hole? OK…and yes, “evidence of God” is a good term.
1 Like
Jennifer, your interpretation of the Garden of Eden portion of Genesis makes a great deal more sense (to me) than the purely orthodox versions that I’ve encountered the past. Indeed, with a little tweaking, as required by the acceptance of evolution (both biological and cultural), it makes good sense as the way an intelligent Creator would inspire humankind to rise above its animal roots and strive to imitate Him–to eventually build His Kingdom on earth.
At its core, this is what is meant by ‘a journey of redemption’; or, as a creature choosing the self-sacrifices necessary to become His co-creators.
In my view, the gift of Mind and Conscience that conferred upon humankind a sense of morality (that previously was non-existent) did not immediately result in an Edenic existence for Adam & Eve–only the promise that such a happy and productive existence was possible. Indeed, as you stated: 'it’s probably the hardest thing a human being can do.’ We Christians believe that, before the Big Bang which initiated this Universe, God anticipated the need for Christ as a Universal Messiah, and who became incarnate on this earth as Jesus, a human being who could lead a truly moral life that the Father desired of the rest of humankind.
Al Leo
Shawn, it never ceases to amaze me that two supposedly healthy minds can interpret metaphors in two totally opposed fashions. I interpret “the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” as the Conscience that God gives us to guide us in following His will. How in the world do you associate it with Satan?
Al Leo
1 Like
Dear Leo,
There is more than one metaphor in inspired texts, and they often tell a completely different story. I explain the metaphors in the trees and rivers in the Garden in my paper We all have the same spiritual ancestry. I am not saying it is the only metaphor in the story of the garden, it is one that pulls many images together into a coherent picture, for me.
Do you agree that Jesus is the light of the world and whoever believes in Him will receive eternal life? (John 8:12) If you agree with that, then it follows that Adam and Eve did not receive eternal life when they chose to eat from “the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” and not from “the Tree of Life.”
Satan is “the prince of lies” and we know that the best lies are corrupted truths. The root of every truly evil event in human history was based in truth. This pervasion of the truth is Calle propaganda. Some might think that it is evil to decapitate someone, but true evil is convincing the victim to decapitate themselves or convincing his father to do it. This is how the Knowledge of Good and Evil is so dangerous.
My favorite metaphor for the relationship between Jesus and Satan occurs at the death of Jesus on the cross - when the moon eclipses the sun (source of life). The moon is another metaphor for Satan, who only imperfectly reflects the light of Jesus (sun). His true face is seen only during an eclipse, when we see it does not give life and contains only darkness.
Best Wishes, Shawn
Speaking of mixing truth with falsehoods … your post above seems disturbing to me, perhaps because of just such a mixture of strange spirits that you seem to follow. Not to mention all the talk of “decapitation” which is a strange and unnecessary subject to pursue for your point (it seems to me.) And no, this is not a request for further clarification on anything about that. I have zero interest in where you are trying to go with these strange mixtures of gnosticism with bits of truth thrown in. I simply want to register my own remarks here to remind readers that such tangents are not generally reflective of Biologos commitments (apart from the paragraph about Jesus being the light of the world, and a few other bits of scattered truth).
3 Likes
Well…inspiring humankind to rise above “its animal roots and strive to imitate Him — to eventually build His Kingdom on earth”…
Those are all really good thoughts. But is not this Intelligent Creator the same One who said “there is none who does righteous no not one” I agree that Jesus lived a truly moral life which is what God desires for the rest of humanity. But we are incapable of it and even refuse to attempt it. Just look at the situation in most office environments today for examples of that…
As I said, good thoughts on your part and Realspiritik, but Eden is more “paradise lost” and not something that we can re-gain on our own. If human effort were possible, then God Himself would not have needed to do what He did.
Dear Mervin,
This is a spiritual topic that I know you seem to avoid. The flaming sword is held by a spiritual beings, angel (Cherubims). None of that has anything to do with Gnosticism, it is straight out of the Bible.
So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis 3:24)
Therefore, the Tree of Life is a spiritual entity and the name clearly points to Jesus as I previously stated. I was trying to demonstrate with my graphic example the dangers of considering Good and Evil as anything but the source of all evil.
Best Wishes, Shawn
Ps. I picked this example instead of Hitler because I have had James Foley on my mind recently. (A dear friend is writing his autobiography.)
As the first of your quotes above states, the metaphors in Scripture can be interpreted in ways that are in total contradiction with each other. This can prove convenient when one tries to “pull many images together” to create a coherent picture. Just pick out the images that fit your preconceived “theory” and discard the rest. This is why, IMHO, the use of the scientific method can help us on the way to establishing theological Truth.
Taking metaphor into the realm of science and the study of the nature of light, some early experiments of the photoelectric effect were best explained if we used the metaphor that light consisted of particles, i.e. photons. But then other experiments, equally valid, fit the metaphor that light was a series of waves in a (not yet detected) medium. Since science does not allow one to pick one metaphor over another (except for superior explanatory power), an entirely new view of nature was revealed: Quantum Physics, where the wave nature of small particles could be predicted by mathematical equations.
Shawn, I respect your efforts to create a ‘consistent picture’ from your extensive study of Scripture and the ANE sources. They just don’t make sense to me (and evidently not to @Mervin_Bitikofer either). On the other hand, some of the arguments put forth by @AntoineSuarez relating Quantum Physics to ChristianFaith are a bit ‘above my pay grade’ as a scientist.
So, as for a reasonable ‘bottom line’, I guess we all can hope that in the elusive search for Truth, we optimize our chances of pleasing our Creator.
Blessings,
Al Leo
p.s. Do you claim that there was a verifiable solar eclipse that occurred in Jerusalem at the moment of Jesus’ death?
[quote=“bluebird, post:29, topic:41013”]… [quoting Al Leo]
Well…inspiring humankind to rise above “its animal roots and strive to imitate Him — to eventually build His Kingdom on earth”…
Those are all really good thoughts. But is not this Intelligent Creator the same One who said “there is none who does righteous no not one”
[/quote]
Robin, this why I have a problem with the concept of ‘biblical inerrancy’. You state that it was the Intelligent Creator who said "there is none who does righteous; no not one". Was it God’s voice, directly? Or was this a quotation from Romans 3:10? And that actually taken as a quotation from Psalms 14 where it is applied specifically to those fools who deny God’s existence?
It makes a world of difference. I consider that in using my intelligence to gain a better understanding of the World that God created, I am worshipping Him as truly as when on my knees in church, or when singing a hymn in a choir.
Admittedly, there are a few scientists who have "gotten too big for their britches." (Words my Mom used when I acted ‘smart-alecky’.), and feel they need no God in their worldview. They are to be pitied. They are missing the best that Life has to offer. John 10:10.
blessings,
Al Leo
1 Like
Hello Aleo, and thanks for the thoughts. I actually agree with a fair amount of what you said here. There is no problem with “using your intelligence to gain a better understanding of the World that God created” and woshipping Him on your knees in church or when singing a hymn is A-OK. We will forgo the size of some scientists’ britches, but your Mom is probably right in general. I do not think all scientists are negative about God and that would be some of the purpose of Biologos.
I am not sure that the matter of “biblical inerrancy” is questioned here, although maybe with some. This thread began with one individual’s query about the this supernatural being holding something at the entrance to the Garden — and what exactly that flaming revolving sword stood for. I did note, as part of a response to him, that something with fire or flame in the description is generally seen to refer to the holiness of God.
What this particular scene looked like, at the time it occurred, is something many of us are trying to imagine — in the same way that people speculate about this Garden or what it meant.
Getting “back to the Garden” – to borrow a line from an old song – seems to be the object of much theory here, and I think it always has been. Some would — and have — note that the Bible records one (or at least one) subsequent attempt by humankind to get back to that Garden. Since the Gate was barred, they tried another angle —and attempted to build a tower.
That did not work out as planned.
If the Garden has some being guarding it (even today??), then discussions of how to get back there – only one entrance? walls too high? can we dig under the walls and come up on the inside? Can we just be really good people?..all these discussions sound interesting. But they did not work for the ones who made attempts at it in the past.
I do like the philosophizing I have seen on this post. It shows that humanity in general has a yearning for “what was”. And there is a reason for this. We were created for fellowship or friendship with God. By expressing allegiance to another of God’s created beings in that Garden (rather than to God Himself), we cut ourselves off from the sort of fellowship that we once had and are trying to figure out how to get back to it — like the builders of that tower seem to have been attempting (another controversy).
As for the matter of Romans 3:10 — or of my assertion that it refers to humanity’s fallen state ---- you assert that it is a reference to some verses from Psalm 14 and applies “specifically to those ‘fools’ who deny God’s existence?” [the ? was yours]
The passage “What then should we conclude? Do we Jews possess an advantage? Certainly not. For we have previously accused all people, both Jews and Gentiles, to be under the power of sin. For it is written, 'There is none righteous. There is not even one. There is no one who understands. There is no one who seeks God.” (Romans 3:9-11).
There is no one I have consulted — from Matthew Henry to John Gill to Adam Clarke to contemporary commentators-- who does not see the verses 9 through 18 as asserting that “all mankind are under the guilt of sin, as a burden,” as M. Henry put it—echoed by Clarke. Three all lived two or three centuries ago, but I know of contemporary commentators who also see the passage as referring to all people and not just “those fools [bf]” you mentioned from Psalm 14. A commentary on Psalms goes into the definition of “fools” and their behavior and the psalm’s application to modern (our era) socioeconomic issues…
All interesting. But the original point has been that early humanity’s transgression got them booted out of a fine place and we have been adrift ever since — except for what God Himself has done and is doing to bring us back to Him (if we want it). “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. …now he [God] has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once …and he will appear a second time…to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.” [Hebrews 9:22, 26, 27, 28 —long passage, please look it up for yourself].
I hope this helps. And as I said, I have no problems with people learning about God’s good creation…That is not the issue here anyway. (I think?)
Dear Leo,
Thank you for the kind reply. It does not take quantum physics, only newtonian physics to recreate a solar eclipse, the difficulty is proving when exactly did Jesus die on the cross. The research have read uses the former to prove the latter. So, there is no “proof” in the purest sense.
Best Wishes, Shawn
No metal swords on earth for thousands of years afterwards, maybe a flaming club?
1 Like
Paradise (Luke 23:43) is not in the material world, or someone would have seen the Cherubims standing around guarding the Tree of Life.
1 Like
The EOC says that the crucifixion did away with the flaming sword which is why Christians can now enter
And are you sure that the afterlife is the same as historical Eden on earth before human history?
oh how do you know??
It was either April 7 of 30 AD or Apr 3 of 33 AD —most likely the latter.
@ErikNelson, good point. Adam would have wondered “What’s a sword? What’s a flame? And could you go over this death thing again, I don’t really get it?”
2 Likes