How did Adam and Eve know good from evil?

like Rrhain, you are now starting from an assumption that is not found in the account. You are stating there was no death before the fall.That is true for adam and eve, but they were not alone in the garden. They lived with animals. Nowhere is any animal given a command to refrain from the tree, to obey God or anything else.Animals die, not because they are sinners but because they are animals and not made in Gods image. Perhaps God planned it that way so Adam and eve would have something to compare life and death.And im not speculating on the animals here....animals die. We know that is a fact. They always must have died because no animal in the bible is given any laws. They do not come under the moral laws of God and therefore they cannot sin. We are told that the consequences of sin is death...that consequence only applies to humans...for animals, death always was.

You actually stated the correct answer....and yet you apparently do not understand your own response. Yes, they relied on god for information, since they needed to rely on someone. But they STILL did not know right from wrong! They had not eaten from the tree yet. A hundred people could have entered the garden, each telling Adam and Eve what to do. They could understand what was asked of them, but they would not know if that information was good or bad. They had no way of knowing.

Could they not have asked God for claification?They had direct communicatin with him, he used to come into the garden to be with them and they were used to that. When he came after they had eaten they went into hiding because they heard him coming...so he was quite familiar to them.Their sin was exactly the fact that they went ahead independently of God and decided something for themselves. They were not designed to do that. They were designed to be completely reliant upon their creator.But this was what their sin was...it was independence which is rebellion. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

But what would that do? No matter what god told them, since they didnt know good and evil, they still would not know if his response was a good one or evil one? How could they know god was good? Since you believe the serpent was evil (I think someone MAAAAAAAY have stressed it was not Satan ), how could either know what he spoke of (hissed?) was good or evil?The key point is, they had NOT eaten from the tree yet. That tree is what imparted them with that knowledge.

you seem to think that they would only have ever known about good and bad if they were independent from GodYet, we are told that the heavens house myriads of faithful angels who have never acted independently of God and have never disobeyed. Does this mean that the angels in heaven are completely devoid of knowledge of good and bad?These angels know of good and bad because thoey listen to Gd...they view bad as what he says is bad. They know of Gods morals and standards, hence they know good from bad.If a parent tells a child not to touch the pot on the stove because they will get burned, the child does not first have to be burned to understand what the parent means. yes they have, but as a christian i listen first and foremost to jesus and the apostles and John told us that the serpent is the devil.
Revelation 12:7-9 "...So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan who is misleading the entire inhabited earth" Jesus also informed us that the devil was the serpent in eden when he said
John 8:44 "YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father. That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth" well like i said, many do not believe the tree had special properties that imparted anything to them. The tree merely represented Gods rulership. When they acted out of harmony with Gods law, they became alienated from him, cut off from their source of knowledge and thus they had begun to make decisions without Gods approval.the knowledge of God was no longer a part of their understanding because they had alienated themselves from God who was the source of their knowledge. Now they were relying on themselves and they had to make up their own laws and standards...the first one of which was to cover their nakedness.

Yet the Bible contradicts everything you've said here and they've pointed it out to you... Should I take the Bible literally or should I listen to peg's none literal interpretation of the Bible?

Ah! I reread what Paul wrore about "through man sin entered the world" and it sure enough can be read as only applying to death of man. Apologies.

Peg avoids my question yet again.Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

purpledawn responds to me:

quote:

---

Boy, you have been asking that question for a long time. I'll take clerendipity. What do I win?

---

Well, if I tell you then I won't be able to ask the question of anybody else, now, will I?Peg completely understands the consequences of the choice. She is not stupid. One will lead to eternal bliss while the other leads to eternal damnation.So why does she refuse to answer?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Peg writes:

quote:

---

but as a christian

---

As a Christian, it is the height of bigotry to tell a Jew what a Jewish text means. Genesis was written by Jews, for Jews, and it can only be understood in a Jewish context. If you want your religious tradition to be given respect, you must show that same respect to others.Now, answer my question, please:Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

quote:

---

i listen first and foremost to jesus and the apostles and John told us that the serpent is the devil.

​

Revelation 12:7-9
...
John 8:44

---

But neither of those passages is referring to the serpent from the garden.First, your translation is wrong for the Revelation quote. It isn't "original" serpent. It's "old" serpent. And by "serpent," they weren't referring to the garden. Greek metaphors used "serpent" as a term for wisdom just as we use "owl" as a term for wisdom...straight out of Greek mythology where Athena, the goddess of wisdom, had the owl as her patron. That's why the symbol of prophecy for the Greeks was the serpent. The symbol for medicine, the caduceus, is a staff with two snakes twining around it. That's because the symbol for Apollo, god of knowledge, was the serpent.This is not a reference to Genesis but to something even more fundamental.Second, there is nothing in John 8 that has any connection to Genesis. Referring to the devil as a murderer is, again, a reference to something more fundamental, not Genesis.Now, answer my question, please:Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

quote:

---

many do not believe the tree had special properties that imparted anything to them.

---

And many people believe that they're the reincarnation of Julius Caesar. That doesn't mean they're right.The text does not say what you think it says. You may believe it does, but it doesn't.Now, answer my question, please:Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

the bible is not exclusively for the jews, it is Gods book and he gives his word to anyone who is willing to listen. My jewish teacher was able to provide some insights into some of the genesis account, but her ideas were not the same as Jesus ideas. Jesus was a jew as were his diciples...if learning the OT from them is bigotry, then so be it. A translator will sometimes use a word that more clearly defines the subject. In the case of the NWT committee, they used 'original serpent' because the Devil used the snake in Eden to fool eve.Now if you want to ask if other translators believe this passage is also a reference to Satan the devil, i have posted the cross references from the NASB from biblegateway. As you can see, they also attribute this 'ancient serpent' reference to Satan the devil. Its strange you mention the jews earlier and then make this comment. My jewish teacher actually agreed with the idea that the tree did not have any special properties in it which imparted some magical knowledge.I guess it depends on who you ask, yes?

You avoid my question yet again, Peg.Beetaratagang or clerendipity?You understand the consequences. You are not stupid. So why are you refusing? Surely you know which is which.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

no comment from you on the revelation verse and the accusation that the NWT is wrong?

Hi Rrhain,I don't think your analogy is correct since for it to be correct, you would have to identify which of Beetaratagang or clerendipity lead to eternal damnation and which to eternal life.Because God did indeed say: If you do this, this is what happens. If you do that, this is what happens. He didn't say 'you can do this and this and this, and one of these things will kill you. Now choose.'AbE. And of course, they didn't have t 'experience' death to know what it is. By knowing what life is, and by knowing that death is the opposite of life, then you can get an idea of what it is. To say that the knowledge of something can only be acquired through experience is fallacious.Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

Rrhain has a point, even if he is the worst at getting them across. The point is that A&E wouldn't know if they should trust god, who said that they would die, or the sepent, who said that they would know good and evil.The funny thing is that the serpent was right and god was wrong (they didn't die and they did get the knowledge).