An honest look at "free-will" #1: Gen.3:4-6

[BobRyan]

Quote:
No - that means you have INFERRED INTO the text that which it never said.

OK, let's see. Scripture says Adam and Eve were naked and not ashamed

Your argument is that God created them WRONG without giving them clothes and they were too stupid to know what God had done WRONG so that was proof they did not know GOOD??

Check your logic again sir.

You "infer" that Adam and Eve did know "good" prior to eating from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", because they knew God. The text doesn't say they knew "good" before they ate of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", but you "infer" they did, because they knew God.

Few people would argue that to Know God IS to know Good as Hosea 6 and Hosea 4 claim.

For "God IS Good" -- Christ makes this point again in John 3 to Nicodemus.

But just in case one is inclined to argue against the view that Knowing God is knowing Good in the case of Adam - God SAYS of all that was done in creation week day 6 "IT was GOOD" so your argument that God had done WRONG on Day 6 and the proof that Adam did not KNOW Good is that he could not see the WRONG that God had done - is then made void.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
You continue to refuse to address my question. The deception of Satan was that Eve would "be like God, knowing good and evil". Isn't that correct?

Bob said -
Yes that was the lie he was telling.

And the lie, the deception, was directly connected (in the text) to the ability of Eve to use her own wisdom when knowing good and evil, isn't that correct?

peace to youraying:

Satan's argument was not "you can not tell good from evil".

In Gen 4 Adam "knew his wife" - the word is the same.

It means to "experience" - it does not mean "know about and clearly identify" as you have supposed.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

Quote:
Your argument is that God created them WRONG without giving them clothes and they were too stupid to know what God had done WRONG so that was proof they did not know GOOD?? (and) But just in case one is inclined to argue against the view that Knowing God is knowing Good in the case of Adam - God SAYS of all that was done in creation week day 6 "IT was GOOD" so your argument that God had done WRONG on Day 6 and the proof that Adam did not KNOW Good is that he could not see the WRONG that God had done - is then made void.

Check your logic again sir.

It is, of course, impossible to have a conversation with someone who is unable or unwilling to accurately repeat my stated position. You are adding nothing to this conversation but misinformation and wild accusations.

Therefore, I am simply going to ignore you from this point forward.

peace to youraying:

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I've lost you okes , you're too high to come by. What's this all about again?

Get it short and simple, please.

Of course Adam - as Eve - knew both good and evil. God told them what is right and what is wrong, so they knew. To know something is not the same as to have done something - in any case not always. They knew, but not by experience . . . yet.

And then again, they sinned, even before they experientially acted out. Because sin is spiritual, first of all; only after, it becomes a wrong act as well.

 

[canadyjd]

Of course Adam - as Eve - knew both good and evil. God told them what is right and what is wrong, so they knew. To know something is not the same as to have done something - in any case not always. They knew, but not by experience . . . yet.

That is not what scripture says.

And then again, they sinned, even before they experientially acted out. Because sin is spiritual, first of all; only after, it becomes a wrong act as well.

Again, that is not what scripture says.

peace to youraying:

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Scripture does say it!

"In the day ye EAT thereof, then your eyes shall be OPENED . . ." to what you have already done and already will have become, sinners!

Then read verse 6 as well. It says Eve "desired" - transgression of the Tenth Commandment : that is sin.
It also says Eve "looked" and found pleasure . . . in evil : BEFORE she actually ate.

So did Adam listen to Eve in stead of to God -- plain disobedience; which is sin.

So the Scripture does say what I have said it says.

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:

And the lie, the deception, was directly connected (in the text) to the ability of Eve to use her own wisdom when knowing good and evil, isn't that correct?

peace to youraying:

Satan's argument was not "you can not tell good from evil".

In Gen 4 Adam "knew his wife" - the word is the same.

It means to "experience" - in the Gen 2-3 context "knowing good and evil" does not mean "know about and clearly identify" as you have supposed nor is that true in Gen 4 "Adam knew his wife".

The wooden use of this term that you are seeking simply can not be done and make any sense at all.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

Scripture does say it!

"In the day ye EAT thereof, then your eyes shall be OPENED . . ." to what you have already done and already will have become, sinners!

Then read verse 6 as well. It says Eve "desired" - transgression of the Tenth Commandment : that is sin.
It also says Eve "looked" and found pleasure . . . in evil : BEFORE she actually ate.

So did Adam listen to Eve in stead of to God -- plain disobedience; which is sin.

So the Scripture does say what I have said it says.

I have already answered this argument from you earlier. I really don't want to repost it.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

Gen 3
22 Then the LORD God said, ""Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever''

Adam Clarke –
Gen 3 http://www.godrules.net/library/clarke/clarkegen3.htm]

Verse 22. Behold, the man is become as one of us] On all hands this text is allowed to be difficult, and the difficulty is increased by our translation, which is opposed to the original Hebrew and the most authentic versions. The Hebrew has hyh hayah, which is the third person preterite tense, and signifies was, not is. The Samaritan text, the Samaritan version, the Syriac, and the Septuagint, have the same tense.

These lead us to a very different sense, and indicate that there is an ellipsis of some words which must be supplied in order to make the sense complete. A very learned man has ventured the following paraphrase, which should not be lightly regarded:
"And the LordGod said, The man who WAS like one of us in purity and wisdom, is now fallen and robbed of his excellence; he has added t[dl ladaath, to the knowledge of the good, by his transgression the knowledge of the evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever in this miserablestate, I will remove him, and guard the place lest he should re-enter. Therefore the LordGod sent him forth from the garden of Eden," &c. This seems to be the most natural sense of the place.

Vs 22 “Knowing Good and Evil” –

http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=Gen+3&section=6&it=nas&oq=Ezek%252044%3A27&ot=lxx&nt=na&new=1&nb=eze&ng=44&ncc=44

“Yada” Heb: Strongs 3045 (Know)

1. • to know by experience 1a
   • to consider

1. 1. 1. to know, be acquainted with
      2. to know (a person carnally)

 

[BobRyan]

7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

John Wesley – Gen 3
http://www.studylight.org/com/wen/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=003

The Eyes of them both were opened - The eyes of their consciences; their hearts smote them for what they had done Now, when it was too late, they saw the happiness they were fallen from, and the misery they were fallen into. They saw God provoked, his favour forfeited, his image lost; they felt a disorder in their own spirits, which they had never before been conscious of; they saw a law in their members warring against the law of their minds, and captivating them both to sin and wrath; they saw that they were naked, that is, that they were stripped, deprived of all the honours and joys of their paradise state, and exposed to all the miseries that might justly be expected from an angry God; laid open to the contempt and reproach of heaven and earth, and their own consciences. And they sewed or platted fig leaves together, and, to cover, at least, part of their shame one from another, made themselves aprons. See here what is commonly the folly of those that have sinned: they are more solicitous to save their credit before men, than to obtain their pardon from God.

 

[canadyjd]

Gen 3
22 Then the LORD God said, ""Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever''

Adam Clarke –
Gen 3 http://www.godrules.net/library/clarke/clarkegen3.htm]

Verse 22. Behold, the man is become as one of us] On all hands this text is allowed to be difficult, and the difficulty is increased by our translation, which is opposed to the original Hebrew and the most authentic versions. The Hebrew has hyh hayah, which is the third person preterite tense, and signifies was, not is. The Samaritan text, the Samaritan version, the Syriac, and the Septuagint, have the same tense.

These lead us to a very different sense, and indicate that there is an ellipsis of some words which must be supplied in order to make the sense complete. A very learned man has ventured the following paraphrase, which should not be lightly regarded:
"And the LordGod said, The man who WAS like one of us in purity and wisdom, is now fallen and robbed of his excellence; he has added t[dl ladaath, to the knowledge of the good, by his transgression the knowledge of the evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever in this miserablestate, I will remove him, and guard the place lest he should re-enter. Therefore the LordGod sent him forth from the garden of Eden," &c. This seems to be the most natural sense of the place.

I don't know much about Adam Clarke. From what little I've read, it seems he was the major theologian for the Methodist church after Wesley. I don't know anything, of course, about the unidentified "learned man" whom he quotes the paraphrase. I just notice he adds an awful lot of words to the text, and that fundamentally changes its meaning.

I have found this comment from the netbible, to which a variety of scholars make contributions (as I understand it)

http://www.bible.org/netbible/

12tn Or “you will have understanding.” This obviously refers to the acquisition of the “knowledge of good and evil,” as the next statement makes clear.

It seems their scholars clearly see an "acquistion" of the knowledge of good and evil after the fall.

13tn Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier.

Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.”


It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”)

An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”).


The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.

14sn You will be like divine beings who know good and evil. The serpent raises doubts about the integrity of God. He implies that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting the divine domain. If the man and woman were to eat, they would enter into that domain. The temptation is to overstep divinely established boundaries. (See D. E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God [PTMS], 25.)

The knowledge of good and evil is a characteristic of God and His divine court. It was not something mankind had, prior to the fall. In attempting to gain that wisdom, (because of the deception of Satan) they fell into sin. They transgressed the commandment of God not to eat of the tree. Their human will was instantly enslaved to sin which ruled their nature with its evil influence and this was then passed on to all mankind.
peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

2 The woman said to the serpent, "" From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;
3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, "You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'''


Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3


2. the woman said, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden--In her answer, Eve extolled the large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongst all the trees--one only excepted, with respect to which, she declared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or the penalty. But there is reason to think that she had already received an injurious impression; for in using the words "lest ye die," instead of "ye shall surely die" [Ge 2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because of some poisonous quality of its fruit. The tempter, perceiving this, became bolder in his assertions.

4 The serpent said to the woman, ""You surely will not die!
5 ""For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.''


Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3

5. your eyes shall be opened--His words meant more than met the ear. In one sense her eyes were opened; for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--of the happiness of a holy, and the misery of a sinful, condition. But he studiously concealed this result from Eve, who, fired with a generous desire for knowledge, thought only of rising to the rank and privileges of her angelic visitants.

Matthew Henry – Gen 3
http://www.studylight.org/com/mhc-con/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=003

Satan questioned whether it were a sin or not, to eat of this tree. He did not disclose his design at first, but he put a question which seemed innocent. Those who would be safe, need to be shy of talking with the tempter. He quoted the command wrong. He spoke in a taunting way. The devil, as he is a liar, so he is a scoffer from the beginning; and scoffers are his children. It is the craft of Satan to speak of the Divine law as uncertain or unreasonable, and so to draw people to sin; it is our wisdom to keep up a firm belief of God's command, and a high respect for it. Has God said, Ye shall not lie, nor take his name in vain, nor be drunk, &c.?.

…
Satan teaches men first to doubt, and then to deny. He promises advantage from their eating this fruit. He aims to make them discontented with their present state, as if it were not so good as it might be, and should be

. He tempts them to seek preferment, as if they were fit to be gods. Satan ruined himself by desiring to be like the Most High, therefore he sought to infect our first parents with the same desire, that he might ruin them too. And still the devil draws people into his interest, by suggesting to them hard thoughts of God,.

 

[BobRyan]

Satan's argument was not "you can not tell good from evil".

In Gen 4 Adam "knew his wife" - the word is the same.

It means to "experience" - in the Gen 2-3 context "knowing good and evil" does not mean "know about and clearly identify" as you have supposed nor is that true in Gen 4 "Adam knew his wife".

The wooden use of this term that you are seeking simply can not be done and make any sense at all.

Vs 22 “Knowing Good and Evil” –

http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=Gen+3&section=6&it=nas&oq=Ezek%252 044%3A27&ot=lxx&nt=na&new=1&nb=eze&ng=44&ncc=44

“Yada” Heb: Strongs 3045 (Know)

1. • to know by experience 1a
   • to consider

1. 1. 1. to know, be acquainted with
      2. to know (a person carnally)

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

2 The woman said to the serpent, "" From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;
3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, "You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'''


Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3


2. the woman said, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden--In her answer, Eve extolled the large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongst all the trees--one only excepted, with respect to which, she declared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or the penalty. But there is reason to think that she had already received an injurious impression; for in using the words "lest ye die," instead of "ye shall surely die" [Ge 2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because of some poisonous quality of its fruit. The tempter, perceiving this, became bolder in his assertions.

4 The serpent said to the woman, ""You surely will not die!
5 ""For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.''


Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3

5. your eyes shall be opened--His words meant more than met the ear. In one sense her eyes were opened; for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--of the happiness of a holy, and the misery of a sinful, condition. But he studiously concealed this result from Eve, who, fired with a generous desire for knowledge, thought only of rising to the rank and privileges of her angelic visitants.

Matthew Henry – Gen 3
[URL="http://www.studylight.org/com/mhc-con/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=003"]http://www.studylight.org/com/mhc-con/view.cgi?book=ge&chapter=003
[/URL]

They seem to agree with me. Are you now agreeing with me?

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Satan's argument was not "you can not tell good from evil".

In Gen 4 Adam "knew his wife" - the word is the same.

It means to "experience" - in the Gen 2-3 context "knowing good and evil" does not mean "know about and clearly identify" as you have supposed nor is that true in Gen 4 "Adam knew his wife".

The wooden use of this term that you are seeking simply can not be done and make any sense at all.

Vs 22 “Knowing Good and Evil” –

http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=Gen+3&section=6&it=nas&oq=Ezek%252 044%3A27&ot=lxx&nt=na&new=1&nb=eze&ng=44&ncc=44

“Yada” Heb: Strongs 3045 (Know)

1. • to know by experience 1a
   • to consider

1. 1. 1. to know, be acquainted with
      2. to know (a person carnally)

In Christ,

Bob

The context always determines the meaning of the words. In Gen. 4, Adam "knew" his wife and she became pregnant. It is pretty clear what "knew" means there. Obviously, Gen. 4 takes place after Gen. 3, and the fall.

The distinction you are trying to make in Gen. 3 does not make a difference. Whether they "knew mentally" of good and evil after the fall, or they "knew by experience" good and evil after the fall, the fact remains that, according to the text, they didn't "know" it until after the fall.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

The text never says "they did not know good".

The text never says they did not know that rebellion was bad.

The word shows that prior to sin they had not experienced evil - it was not something they DID know at that time. They only knew obedience, perfect peace and harmony with God in HIS paradise worshiping on the 7th day of creation week - in perfect full and complete harmony with their maker.

Obviously.


Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3

5. your eyes shall be opened--His words meant more than met the ear. In one sense her eyes were opened; for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--of the happiness of a holy, and the misery of a sinful, condition. But he studiously concealed this result from Eve, who, fired with a generous desire for knowledge, thought only of rising to the rank and privileges of her angelic visitants.





There is NO indication that she "acquired an experience of what it means to be GOOD and SINLESS" at the forbidden tree


In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3


2. the woman said, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden--In her answer, Eve extolled the large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongst all the trees--one only excepted, with respect to which, she declared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or the penalty. But there is reason to think that she had already received an injurious impression; for in using the words "lest ye die," instead of "ye shall surely die" [Ge 2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because of some poisonous quality of its fruit. The tempter, perceiving this, became bolder in his assertions.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Canadyjd:

"the fact remains that, according to the text, they didn't "know" it until after the fall."

GE:

Then you can't speak of a 'fall'. They knew before; or God's warning to them before was empty talk. They knew because they understood God. To know sin doesn't require one must be a sinner.

 

[canadyjd]

The text never says they did not know that rebellion was bad.

The word shows that prior to sin they had not experienced evil - it was not something they DID know at that time.

I will repeat what I have stated before. The tree is the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Whether you hold that it means "experience" of "good and evil" or "mental understanding" (which is what the text says, "their eyes were opened") of good and evil, makes no difference.

Unless you ignore the text, you must agree that the "experience" or the "mental understanding" of both good and evil came after the fall. That is why the tree is named "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", and not "the tree of the knowledge of evil".

Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3

5. your eyes shall be opened--His words meant more than met the ear. In one sense her eyes were opened; for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--of the happiness of a holy, and the misery of a sinful, condition. But he studiously concealed this result from Eve, who, fired with a generous desire for knowledge, thought only of rising to the rank and privileges of her angelic visitants.

and

There is NO indication that she "acquired an experience of what it means to be GOOD and SINLESS" at the forbidden tree

I notice Jamieson agrees that both "good and evil" experiences were "acquired" after the fall. Your own quoted source disagrees with you.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--

Is it your claim that the GOOD she was doing first hand while obeying God could not REALLY be experienced until she did evil? Is it your argument that "to sin is to experience good"??