Were Adam and Eve created to be sin free? If so, why did God create the Tree of Knowledge and then forbid them to eat of the fruit?

Comments

• nice answer Dave

  • Report
  

  by wfbrad on March 25th, 2006

• Great.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous too on September 27th, 2006

• Although I am not Christian, I commend you on great answer.

  • Report
  

  by LeMeThink on March 19th, 2007

• Well, we have no choices actually. We don't obey, we go to hell to suffer eternally. We are like a servant of a lunatic master. The master deliberately set a trap to let us fall into. Then he will whip us eternally.
  
  By the way, isn't too severe for God to send us into hell eternally if we only made one little mistake? As a little child, my parent forbid me to eat candy but I stole their money to buy them anyways. Therefore should my parent send me to the jail to suffer the eternal fire?

  • Report
  

  by Dr.Tso on July 9th, 2007

• if Adam & Eve had been created without the freedom to choose, then they would never have sinned.
  
  -
  so, what's so great about freedom to choose? the best thing it can lead to (absence of sin) is what would have happened if this freedom had never existed in the first place.

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• "Adam was right there with her at the time."
  No he wasn't. She brought it to him later.
  "I'm also grateful for the cross of Jesus Christ."
  Hurrah for you. You're grateful that your religion is based upon human sacrifice and immensely vicious eternal punishment. Not to mention the cannibalism of the Communion: eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the man you are supposed to be following.

  • Report
  

  by Sandman on January 2nd, 2009

• Hello Sandman, you seem to be a very intelligent young man so I am confused of your comment. The eatting of Jesus's flesh he himself took part in this at the last supper. And we are just going to assume that he did not cut himself to make the last supper possible.LOL
  Of coarse, this is symbolic, in honor of him and what he did for you and I. And when the bible did mention cannibalism, it was due to disobedience which left a group of people without resources. Where in this case they would result to this free will action,that God himself hadnot condoned.
  However, if you ever watch or read any articles of groups of people that are practicing this horrible practice there bodies begin to reject human flesh which causes a disorder in their brain which causes them to go into seizures.
  So my point is that God never intended for the human body to be equipt to consume human flesh.
  Check out you tube and look up its supernatrual and see why we really need to know Jesus.

  • Report
  

  by mizz77 on December 4th, 2009

• it never says Eve was warned about the fruit - she came on the scene after Adam was told, but she was never told

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on December 4th, 2009

• so, freedom to choose is good, but to exercise that choice is bad.
  And the All-Knowing has to keep testing his creation, because he doesn't know if it's good or not.
  I think I got it now.

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on December 4th, 2009

Comments

• +1 The OLDEST Bible in the world is in a museum in Europe. It tells of a different story than what we have today. It states that there is more than one being that can create. You have God(as we know him) who is the All. From the All, other entities were created before humans. These entities being directly created from the all also have the ability to create. Some of these entities had a hand in creating us. This is why Genesis says "Let Us make man". This is also why they were afraid- "Man has become like US, to know good and evil". This is why we are not allowed to live forever. Earlier man called a number of these beings "God". The way they used the term God is different from how we use the term. There is a big difference from what we are taught and what the truth is.

  • Report
  

  by Truth Seeker on December 7th, 2009

Comments

• Great answer!

  • Report
  

  by Answers101 on March 19th, 2006

Comments

Comments

Comments

• so they were one tree away from being godlike? i wonder why that other tree wasn't forbidden as well?
  -
  why would it be so terrible if they had lived forever? wasn't that Plan A in the first place?
  -
  who's "us" ? ("like one of us")

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• Ever heard of the royal "we"...? Same thing...
  Aside from that, I don't think you're actually interested in understanding anything, so I'll not waste any further time on someone who's simply toying around for his own entertainment...

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 2nd, 2008

• the royal "we" referred to the king/queen plus the other subordinate court members - another theory is the other members of the Trinity - another theory is that this shows the polytheistic roots of judaism, which seems the most plausible to me
  -
  i would like to have answers to my questions, but they seem to be unanswerable

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• what if they had eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life first?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on May 26th, 2009

Comments

Comments

• the ancients thought that snakes live forever. when they saw a snake shedding its skin, they thought it was a young snake crawling out of the old snake's body.

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

• hm...so they were created with wrong or false beliefs?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• No, they were created with free will. The will to choose for themselves. They were not created and programmed to be robots, having no choice in the matter. They were given free will, and they were tempted. The temptation didn't seem like such a big deal, but it represented a choice to not adhere to what they were instructed to do. It has nothing to do with wrong or false beliefs. It had everything to do with free will, choice, and obedience... it also clearly demonstrated the fact that temptation is often quite deceptive and can be very hard to resist, especially for someone who is innocent and doesn't realize how severe consequences can be.

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 2nd, 2008

• Yes, exactly, gmeades. :)

  • Report
  

  by unknown on July 2nd, 2008

• then what's so great about free will, and what's so terrible about robots?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• So, you're saying that you'd prefer to have no ability to make any choices for yourself, and you'd like to be completely controlled by a source outside of yourself, then...? Nice...

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 2nd, 2008

• I could use a slave, purplecows. LOL I have some yard work that needs doing.

  • Report
  

  by unknown on July 2nd, 2008

• got any fruit trees?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• Sure... they're poisonous, but feel free... ;-)

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 2nd, 2008

• if i have no ability to make any evil sinful bad choices for myself, and all i do is good because that is my nature and it is impossible for me to do otherwise, then i don't see a problem with that, that would be wonderful.
  -
  and if that were the case, there is no such thing as "control"
  -
  for example, i cannot travel backward in time. i may wish to, or be tempted to, but it never happens. does some outside force "control" me in this matter of non-time-traveling? do i feel that my freedom is impaired because i can't travel backward in time? do i feel deprived? no. that's just the way my nature is.
  -
  the distasteful "control" is when i make a choice and attempt to execute it, and another decision-maker interferes and cancels out my efforts, through force or threats

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• if, if, if... goodness, you certainly do come up with a lot of "ifs"... how 'bout getting back to a bit of reality for a change...? and enjoy the fruit... ;-)

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 2nd, 2008

• well, you asked.
  (and i only count one hypothesis)
  -
  hey! this fruit has a talking worm in it!

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 3rd, 2008

• I don't recall anyone asking you anything, but you've going on quite a bit... it seems endlessly... about what, who knows...?

  • Report
  

  by gmeades on July 3rd, 2008

• Well, I think I will chose to unsubscribe because as entertaining as this is, I am not quite in the mood. I am going through some tough times and I just don't have the energy to give this my full attention. Please, feel free to carry on without me. :)

  • Report
  

  by unknown on July 3rd, 2008

• reality? I come to AB to get AWAY from reality!
  -
  try this "if" on for size:
  what if Adam had said no? would humanity still be all sinners? 50% sinners? only the women?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 3rd, 2008

Comments

• usually the purpose of a test is to find out something.
  what does the Omniscient need a test for?

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

Comments

• God, knowing they wouldn't obey, wanted to know if they would obey. So he made a test, knowing they would fail, and punished them (and us) for it.
  And this is the same God who tells us to forgive 7*70 times.

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on July 2nd, 2008

• "God wanted us to feel His love thats why. He ... sacrificed His ... SON to die on the cross" in horrible agony.
  *
  "They didn't do what I said, so SOMEBODY's got to DIE."
  *
  We could all live long and much more happily without a "love" like that.

  • Report
  

  by Sandman on January 2nd, 2009

• God made His Image, and then tested it, and it failed.
  So He punished it.
  He also punishes its children, who are also His Image.
  Then He punished Himself, so now He doesn't have to punish His Image any more, but only on certain conditions.
  Good news!

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on January 2nd, 2009

• About this "ONLY BEGOTTEN SON" business -- Scarcity creates the perception of value. If God had a gazillion sons, then sacrificing one of them wouldn't seem like such a big deal as sacrificing the ONLY ONE.
  But the Almighty could create a gazillion sons with a snap of Its fingers if It wanted to.
  Another thing - humans die, so a man's only son is all that will be left of him after that man dies. That man's son is 100% of everything. If the man's son dies, then there will be nothing left of the man. But is God going to die? No.
  So the use of that phrase ONLY BEGOTTEN SON sounds like deceitful, emotional manipulativeness to me.

  • Report
  

  by purplecows on January 2nd, 2009

Comments