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

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

HeavenlyPilgim:

"it is not true that the mere recognition of the allurements of temptation is sin."

GE:

They recognised or found and made God the liar. They found it good to eat, while God said you may not eat of it and that if you eat you will surely die. But no, said man in his wisdom, it is good to eat. That was their sinning before they plucked and before they ate.
Or would you say that wasn't sin?

 

[canadyjd]

They recognised or found and made God the liar. They found it good to eat, while God said you may not eat of it and that if you eat you will surely die. But no, said man in his wisdom, it is good to eat. That was their sinning before they plucked and before they ate.
Or would you say that wasn't sin?

Because scripture says that sin entered by the transgression of the command not to eat. It did not enter prior to the transgression, according to scripture.

Scripture also tells us that God made all the trees in the garden good for food, and pleasing to the eye. Eve was repeating what had already been stated when she found the fruit pleasing to the eye and good for food.

What was added were the words, "and desirable to make one wise". That was the deception of Satan.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

Ok, BobRyan, Show me the words "Adam knew that God was good" in the text? Oh, they are not there! You must be adding them to the text.

Your bend and wrench of scripture seems to be without end.

#1. You change "they did not know good AND evil" to they did not KNOW GOOD OR evil. You state that you don't think they knew it was GOOD to OBEY God

#2. You insert the false teaching that they did not even know that God was Good!! (which may explain why you also imagine that they did not know it was good to OBEY God).

#3. God SAYS that at the end of the SIXth day ALL was good -- and you come back with the wild statement
"Ok BobRyan, show me the words "Adam knew good because God made everything good, but did not know evil?"

AS IF we are supposed to think that BEFOR DOING evil Adam "knew evil by experience" which is the word for KNOW here!

Your games have all been exposed on each of those point so far sir.

Try something substantive.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

#1. You change "they did not know good AND evil" to they did not KNOW GOOD OR evil. You state that you don't think they knew it was GOOD to OBEY God

I changed nothing, BobRyan. I said they did not know good or evil before they ate of the "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Your own quoted source, Mr. Jamieson affirmed that position.

You, however, claimed the bible says "did not know BOTH good and evil". You put those words in quotes (as if it were a direct quote from scripture), and made the statement "the bible says". You have done exactly what you claimed I did (but I did not).

You have added words to scripture to make it fit your beliefs.

#2. You insert the false teaching that they did not even know that God was Good!! (which may explain why you also imagine that they did not know it was good to OBEY God). and

#3. God SAYS that at the end of the SIXth day ALL was good -- and you come back with the wild statement "Ok BobRyan, show me the words "Adam knew good because God made everything good, but did not know evil?"

I inserted no teaching at all. You claimed I added words to scripture. I asked you to show me those words in scripture. You are teaching them. You are making the assumptions, based on what you want scripture to teach.

The fact is that the words "Adam knew God was good" are not found in Genesis. The fact is, none of the statements you have made confident assertions about are found in the text, and are, in fact, contradicted by the plain meaning of the words in context.

AS IF we are supposed to think that BEFOR DOING evil Adam "knew evil by experience" which is the word for KNOW here!

I have shown you the very Hebrew words for "know (by experience)" and "knowledge", and identified them by number and have demonstrated they are different words. And yet, you keep making the same argument over and over, that "knowledge" really means "know by experience". :BangHead: And then you have the audacity to tell me to make a "substansive" argument?

Your games have all been exposed on each of those point so far sir.

The only thing that has been exposed is your complete lack of understanding of the the most basic concepts in bible study.

I have met few people in my life as able as you are in not allowing the plain meaning of the words of scripture to get in the way of what they want to believe.

peace to youraying:

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Because scripture says that sin entered by the transgression of the command not to eat. It did not enter prior to the transgression, according to scripture.

Scripture also tells us that God made all the trees in the garden good for food, and pleasing to the eye. Eve was repeating what had already been stated when she found the fruit pleasing to the eye and good for food.

What was added were the words, "and desirable to make one wise". That was the deception of Satan.

peace to youraying:

GE:

You said, "Because scripture says that sin entered by the transgression of the command not to eat." It's not so. There's nothing of the sort written. It says sin was there before the Law was there. And the tenth commandment in any case says thou shalt not covet --- which both Adam and Eve had committed the sin of before they had eaten of the tree.

 

[canadyjd]

Thanks for the debate, GE. I'll let you have the last word.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

HeavenlyPilgim:

"it is not true that the mere recognition of the allurements of temptation is sin."

GE:

They recognised or found and made God the liar. They found it good to eat, while God said you may not eat of it and that if you eat you will surely die. But no, said man in his wisdom, it is good to eat. That was their sinning before they plucked and before they ate.
Or would you say that wasn't sin?

It is true that Eve's brains were functioning as and before it instructed her arm to reach out and grab the forbidden fruit.

At some microsecond before acually taking the fruit and eating she DECIDED to do so.

But getting to the points prior to that hair splitting -- God never said that BEING tempted is a sin - He has always said that SINNING is a sin. YIELDING to temptation is sin.

(I think Calvinism prefers a much more unjust view of God).

But as we all know - I do not agree with your Adam sinned and then God "called it good" teachings.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I changed nothing, BobRyan. I said they did not know good OR evil before they ate of the "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Your own quoted source, Mr. Jamieson affirmed that position.

Neither the Bible NOR Jamieson have been quoted on this thread saying "They did not know GOOD OR Evil".

If you had such a quote - you would surely have given it by now.

This we can all easily see.

Your tweak of the text to say "They did not know Good OR EVIL" is to make YOUR point that although created GOOD and knowing God who IS GOOD (John 3) they did not KNOW GOOD!!

How sad.

Your error is fully exposed at that point.

How instructive.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Canadyjd
The fact is that the words "Adam knew God was good" are not found in Genesis.

This is THEN the extreme position to which your wild views have lead you in Gen 2 and 3. You conclude the very unbiblical position that God creates man GOOD and declares him to be GOOD - and that that GOOD condition is a condition where mankind DOES NOT KNOW that his Creator is in fact GOOD NOR does mankind even know what GOOD is!!??

How sad that you would willingly go to such wild extremes.

How instructive that we find NNE agreeing with you on such wild notions -- not in quote, not in print, not on this board ... not anywhere!

How in the world can you be content wich such wildly unbiblical positions??

To quote someone recently on this board

" The fact is, none of the statements you have made confident assertions about are found in the text, and are, in fact, contradicted by the plain meaning of the words in context."

I have shown you the very Hebrew words for "know (by experience)" and "knowledge", and identified them by number and have demonstrated they are THE SAME words in Gen 2, 3 and in Gen 4.

Gen 3 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)

• • to know by experience 1a
  • to consider

• • • to know, be acquainted with
    • to know (a person carnally)

And yet, you keep making the same argument over and over, that "knowledge" CAN NOT mean "know by experience". :BangHead: And then you have the audacity to tell me you have made a "substansive" argument?

The only thing that has been exposed is your complete lack of understanding of the the most basic concepts in bible study.

I have met few people in my life as able as you are in not allowing the plain meaning of the words of scripture to get in the way of what they want to believe.

peace to youraying:

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BobRyan:

"God never said that BEING tempted is a sin -"

I haven't said that - it's your twisting of my words; no of God's Word that says thou shalt not covet. They sinned by coveting ere they sinned by eating. Besides there's no commandment thou shalt not eat, but the commandment of the world's pious (Col.2:20-21)

 

[canadyjd]

Neither the Bible NOR Jamieson have been quoted on this thread saying "They did not know GOOD OR Evil". If you had such a quote - you would surely have given it by now. This we can all easily see.

The following quote was given by BobRyan on page 14 of this thread.

RobRyan: 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.

Notice that BobRyan's own quoted source, Mr. Jamieson, says "her eyes were opened; for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil".

Notice the "acquired" experience is of both "good and evil" according to Mr. Jamieson. She realized, after eating from the tree, the happiness of her condition prior, and the misery of her condition after eating of the tree.

When were their eyes opened? Scripture says after they ate of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil".

Mr. Jamieson can see what the bible clearly teaches. Not only can BobRyan not understand scripture, he can't even understand his own quoted sources.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Gen 3 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)

• • to know by experience 1a
  • to consider

• • • to know, be acquainted with
    • to know (a person carnally)

Let me point out the obvious first. Gen. 3v.22 is after the fall. So "knowing" good and evil after the fall is entirely consistent with what I have been saying all along. Whether you want to say it is "know by experience" or "know by acquiring information mentally" makes no difference. The fact remains, the knowledge of both good and evil were acquired after the fall, which God affirms in 3v22.

Now let me repeat what I stated earlier. Words have meaning in context. I have not found Strongs to be particularly thorough in giving definitions. It often gives the basic meaning of the root, but not the particular meaning of the word.

The word in Gen. 2:9 (knowledge) in "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", and the word God uses in 3v22 "knowing good and evil" is "daath" Hebrew word#1847. It means knowledge. It is formed from the Hebrew word#3045 "yada", but it is not the same word.

As with all words, the context determines the meaning. When scripture says "their eyes were opened" after the fall, that is saying they acquired mental information. The information they "acquired" is the knowledge of good and evil, which is what God says in v.22.

The word used in Gen.4:1, "Adam knew his wife" is "yada" Hebrew word #3045. In that context, it means to know intimately.

There are times when "yada" means know by experience. You might argue that meaning for Gen.4v1. The context does not allow that meaning in v22, after the fall, because it says "their eyes were opened" and that refers to mentally acquiring information.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

Notice the "acquired" experience is of both "good and evil" according to Mr. Jamieson. She realized, after eating from the tree, the happiness of her condition

Jamieson's text does not support the failed argument that Eve did not know the happiness of obedience and loyalty to God UNTIL she sinned.

I know in fact of NO Christian Bible scholar that argues such a point!

The "acquired experience" of Eve was that of OBEDIENCE before the fall - before sinning and that of EVIL (of disobedience) AFTER engaging in active rebellion. She only had the experience of having done BOTH once she sinned - prior to that she was only on the OBEDIENCE and LOYALTY side of that equation.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I have shown you the very Hebrew words for "know (by experience)" and "knowledge", and identified them by number and have demonstrated they are THE SAME words in Gen 2, 3 and in Gen 4.

Gen 3 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)

• • to know by experience 1a
  • to consider

• • • to know, be acquainted with
    • to know (a person carnally)

And yet, you keep making the same argument over and over, that "knowledge" CAN NOT mean "know by experience". :BangHead: And then you have the audacity to tell me you have made a "substansive" argument?

 

[BobRyan]

Let me point out the obvious first. Gen. 3v.22 is after the fall. So "knowing" good and evil after the fall is entirely consistent with what I have been saying all along. Whether you want to say it is "know by experience" or "know by acquiring information mentally" makes no difference. The fact remains, the knowledge of both good and evil were acquired after the fall, which God affirms in 3v22.

It never ceases to amaze me that this board leaves it up to ME to state the obvious!

God stated that "it was GOOD" after making Adam and Eve and ALL animal life on day 6. HE says it was GOOD you say "they did not even know WHAT GOOD WAS".

How obviously failed your logic is at that point is left as a simple exercise for the reader.

Your subsequent argument that only by REBELLION did man learn what it means to "be GOOD" is not even an argument that holds long enough for the reader to even investigate. It fails before it gets started.

SIN is not the means of knowing what Good is - not according to scripture. In God's Word what is GOOD comes about FIRST and THEN comes sin.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

I have shown you the very Hebrew words for "know (by experience)" and "knowledge", and identified them by number and have demonstrated they are THE SAME words in Gen 2, 3 and in Gen 4.

I looked up the words in my Hebrew bible. They are different words. They are "daath" and "yada" as I have explained several times.

But I realize that will mean nothing to you because you never let real facts get in the way of what you want to believe.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Jamieson's text does not support the failed argument that Eve did not know the happiness of obedience and loyalty to God UNTIL she sinned.

That is exactly what Jamieson says. Here, I'll make it a little bigger so you can see it.

RobRyan: 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.

Jamieson clearly says what scripture clearly teaches. After their "eyes were opened" they "acquired" the knowledge of good and evil. Whether the word knowledge is replaced by "experience" makes no difference. Jamieson says the knowledge or experience was acquired after they ate of the tree.

But I realize that will mean nothing to you because you never let real facts get in the way of what you want to believe.

peace to youraying:

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

They 'aquired' knowledge of both good and evil, by word of God, and, by own experience, confirmed what the word of God had told them, before they even thought of disobeying.

But what's the point? The Bible hastens to get to the story of redemption -- from sin. It spends NO time on man's supposed 'good' life before their sinning. In the Bible story, ONLY what God did, was 'good', and ALL that man did, was to sin.
I believe both these histories were the histories of the sixth day of creation.

 

[canadyjd]

They 'aquired' knowledge of both good and evil, by word of God, and, by own experience, confirmed what the word of God had told them, before they even thought of disobeying.

But what's the point?

The point goes back to the original question of the thread. What was the deception of Satan? How does that effect our understanding of "free will"?

The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will when "knowing" good and evil. Eve thought the tree "desirable to make one wise". The deception was directly connected with the human ability to "know" good and evil.

But that was a lie. When they "knew" good and evil, they were enslaved to sin because of their transgression of the command not to eat of the tree.

And so, the very first deception of Satan appealed to the idea of "free will". It was a lie then. It remains a lie today.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

I have shown you the very Hebrew words for "know (by experience)" and "knowledge", and identified them by number and have demonstrated they are THE SAME words in Gen 2, 3 and in Gen 4.

And yet, you keep making the same argument over and over, that "knowledge" CAN NOT mean "know by experience". :BangHead: And then you have the audacity to tell me you have made a "substansive" argument?

Another thing. It is intellectually dishonest, and worse, to quote my posts, changing a word or two, as if they were your own posts.

Engage your own brain for a change. I'm beginning to feel like I'm arguing with myself.

peace to youraying: