Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JohnR7

Tree of Knowledge, Garden of Eden

Recommended Posts

Genesis 2: 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." 

There is a lot I do not understand about this tree of knowledge. Why would God plant a tree with fruit that: "was a delight to the eyes".  Then forbid them to eat the fruit from this tree?

Genesis 3 6"When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate"

Genesis 1:31  31"God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good."

IF everything God made was good then where did the evil come from?  Why did God plant this tree if it was not good for them? If day means day then why did they not die the day they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  

Also I wonder about Ezekiel when he talks about the Cedar trees of Lebanon. 

Ezekiel 31 "9'I made it beautiful with the multitude of its branches, And all the trees of Eden, which were in the garden of God, were jealous of it.

If all of the tree of Eden were Jealous of the cedar in Lebanon, does that mean Lebanon was better than Eden back in it's days of purity?  Also how can a tree be "Jealous", do they have feeling?  Could a tree talk like a snake could talk back in the days of Eden? 

Edited by JohnR7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the trees and fruit and animals and such were good, a delight to the eyes, and enjoyable to be in the midst of and around.  The tree of the knowledge of good and evil wasn't anymore special or delightful than anything else.

Adam and Eve had no interest in that tree at all to start with.  They weren't afraid of it.  They weren't drawn to it.  It just didn't make a blip on their radar screen.  Their interest was in the bounty of other trees that God had given.  It wasn't until the devil deceived Eve that all she should could focus on was that one blasted tree.

How did that work?  By nature, we are drawn to what is forbidden.  Adam and Eve were not born with a sin nature, but they grew one so to speak that passes down to all of us.

It wouldn't have mattered what command God gave: [1] don't eat from that tree, or [2] don't play with the monkeys, or [3] don't pick the roses, or [d] don't leave banana peels all over the place.

What matters is that God - in his holiness - wanted Adam and Eve to be holy.  They could not be holy until they understood that they were NOT God and were in danger as the creation of sinning against his holiness, did sin, and needed redemption.  God wasn't desiring them to sin, but knew that they would.

The tree didn't make them sin.  It didn't entice them.  Even the law of "don't eat" didn't draw them to sin.  It was the desire to "be like God" that caused them to sin.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jayne said:

All of the trees and fruit and animals and such were good, a delight to the eyes, and enjoyable to be in the midst of and around.  The tree of the knowledge of good and evil wasn't anymore special or delightful than anything else.

Adam and Eve had no interest in that tree at all to start with.  They weren't afraid of it.  They weren't drawn to it.  It just didn't make a blip on their radar screen.  Their interest was in the bounty of other trees that God had given.  It wasn't until the devil deceived Eve that all she should could focus on was that one blasted tree.

How did that work?  By nature, we are drawn to what is forbidden.  Adam and Eve were not born with a sin nature, but they grew one so to speak that passes down to all of us.

It wouldn't have mattered what command God gave: [1] don't eat from that tree, or [2] don't play with the monkeys, or [3] don't pick the roses, or [d] don't leave banana peels all over the place.

What matters is that God - in his holiness - wanted Adam and Eve to be holy.  They could not be holy until they understood that they were NOT God and were in danger as the creation of sinning against his holiness, did sin, and needed redemption.  God wasn't desiring them to sin, but knew that they would.

The tree didn't make them sin.  It didn't entice them.  Even the law of "don't eat" didn't draw them to sin.  It was the desire to "be like God" that caused them to sin.  

 

 

 

Sis you need to tell that one to the prosperity gospel , to rome , heck to most churches , cause the many I see ,  its all about that .    I AM   I AM

how bout I AM NOT .  GOD IS , HE IS praise HIM .    

  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JohnR7 said:

Genesis 2: 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." 

There is a lot I do not understand about this tree of knowledge. Why would God plant a tree with fruit that: "was a delight to the eyes".  Then forbid them to eat the fruit from this tree?  

The reason no one can understand Genesis is that it is written as a mystery.  That means God must reveal its higher truths and not man.

No man can tell you what this tree of the garden truly was.

No man has witnessed it.

No one but Adam and Eve witnessed it and they are not telling.  This tells me that God wanted it kept a mystery.

God did reveal the tree of Life intel to me a few years ago.  The 'tree' of life refers to his eternal lineage, which includes not only humans pre-fall, but angels.  

No one needed to know this relationship Adam had to angels, ie. that both are considered related to God, before Jesus's 2nd coming.  but now, we can get this information, if we are open to it.

Lucifer was also an angel and he was considered very beautiful.

Hence his lineage would be considered "a delight to the eyes".

We assume only God has children in the garden, but what exactly was Adam tending in the garden?  Was he a farmer?  Did he prune trees all day for God?

We need to reevaluate our ideas about this 'garden' and begin to realize that the entire garden story is a metaphor for a time and place that does not exist now.  A place somewhere between earth and heaven.  Somewhere that God could walk and talk to man.  Something God can not do now because his presence kills humans immediately.  Moses had to be protected just to glimpse him here.

Our human fraility, our sinful manner, does not allow such sight.

 

  • Oy Vey! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
12 hours ago, JohnR7 said:

Genesis 2: 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." 

There is a lot I do not understand about this tree of knowledge. Why would God plant a tree with fruit that: "was a delight to the eyes".  Then forbid them to eat the fruit from this tree?

Genesis 3 6"When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate"

Genesis 1:31  31"God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good."

IF everything God made was good then where did the evil come from?  Why did God plant this tree if it was not good for them? If day means day then why did they not die the day they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  

Also I wonder about Ezekiel when he talks about the Cedar trees of Lebanon. 

Ezekiel 31 "9'I made it beautiful with the multitude of its branches, And all the trees of Eden, which were in the garden of God, were jealous of it.

If all of the tree of Eden were Jealous of the cedar in Lebanon, does that mean Lebanon was better than Eden back in it's days of purity?  Also how can a tree be "Jealous", do they have feeling?  Could a tree talk like a snake could talk back in the days of Eden? 

God was testing Adam.   The tree was not evil. God does not create moral evil (sin).   The tree did not do anything to Adam and Eve.   It was their disobedience that was at fault.  Ezekiel is using a figure of speech about the trees being jealous.  It is an anthropomorphism, where you give human qualities to non-human things.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

God was testing Adam.   The tree was not evil. God does not create moral evil (sin).   The tree did not do anything to Adam and Eve.   It was their disobedience that was at fault.  Ezekiel is using a figure of speech about the trees being jealous.  It is an anthropomorphism, where you give human qualities to non-human things.  

So what caused them to understand that they were naked if the tree didn't do anything to them?

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
31 minutes ago, other one said:

So what caused them to understand that they were naked if the tree didn't do anything to them?

Sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eileenhat said:

God did reveal the tree of Life intel to me a few years ago.  The 'tree' of life refers to his eternal lineage, which includes not only humans pre-fall, but angels.  

We know that one third of the angels followed in the rebellion. “And his tail swept away a third of the stars of heaven" We know that one third of man will be saved. "This third I will put into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, 'They are my people,' and they will say, 'The LORD is our God.'"  I never really understood the connection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eileenhat said:

We assume only God has children in the garden, but what exactly was Adam tending in the garden?  Was he a farmer?  Did he prune trees all day for God?

We see the word 582 enosh used for husband. Even today they still call the science of animal breeding "animal husbandry".  Also later on we see this word enosh used for Noah. At the Universities at Jerusalem there are PhD's that are experts on the domestication of the ancient plants of the middle east that we read about in the Bible like the Olive tree, fig tree and barley.  They call this botany and mostly they write articles in peer reviewed science journals.  Science has studied how farming was transported from the middle east to europe. We also have history we can study and we have archeology that can give us grains going back 20,000 years. So in addition to the Bible there is a lot of history and science we can study about all the plants and animals that we know were on Noah's Ark.  I first began my study of the ancient history around 50 years ago when I was in High School. We studied the books written by James Breasted, he coined the phrase the fertile crescent. We know that God gave the land to Abraham, all the land that his feet walked on and touched. Today this is the Arab countential plate an area of 1500 by 1500 miles. At some point in time this will be the New Jerusalem. When Jesus returns and His feet touch the ground there will be an earth quake and the east will be separated from the west. At the same time the north will be separated from the south. Today we know about the plate tectonics there at the Mount of Olives. Genesis 3:6, 4:23, 6:9. Genesis 9:20 "And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard"

Gerold Schroeder PhD MIT talks a lot about this. Just the 32 verses in Genesis 1 can be explained in the 50,000 books of science at the Hayden Library at MIT. In addition to the science books at Harvard University that goes into great detail about what Moses gives us in Genesis chapter one. All of science is in the Bible and in what Moses tells us. Because the ancient Hebrew language is based on the use of symbols and even the letters that make up a word are eternal and without limit. The first letter of the first word in the Bible is the second letter in the Hebrew. There are people that go to great lengths talking about the symbolism of that and the letter B (beta) represents. This has a value of 2. Computer language is based on 0 and 1 called binary. DNA works off of OFF & ON. The default position is ON. My sons take very advanced classes in math. I tend to deal with things on a fifth grade level so that a child can understand. Even we have a niece that is working on her PhD in chemical engineering. So she is better at that then even my sons are. 

Edited by JohnR7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

God was testing Adam.   The tree was not evil. God does not create moral evil (sin).   The tree did not do anything to Adam and Eve.   It was their disobedience that was at fault.  Ezekiel is using a figure of speech about the trees being jealous.  It is an anthropomorphism, where you give human qualities to non-human things.  

It could be that they did something to the tree.  The Bible does not talk about apples but science tells us that this is a hybrid tree where man takes the branches from one tree and grafts in into another tree. It could be that God was telling them not to eat from that tree that man had tampered with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Bandit
      How is everyone? Im brand new on this site...cant figure out how to reply to peoples comments yet haha...
      But ive always been a life long believer, got filled with Holy Spirit in a big way in 2015...
      Always have lived a more criminal type of lifestyle, after I got Immersed by the Holy Spirit, I went deep down, lost it all, home, family, dogs got killed, had a lengthy prison sentence hanging over my head, and even commited some serious acts of violence, stole to eat, and panhandled... it took all that chastising, to make me say, I will never go back to that lifestyle again...
      Now finally within the last 3 to 4 months ive FULLY gave into Being a Follower of the Word, Thank The Most High!
      Now I cld go on all day on How much truly awesome stuff happend that day I got filled with Holy spirit, I was by myself living in a camper doing a Study and was praying allowed, went inside talked to my mom, about a friend that had got shot and killed a day or 2 before, I said I didnt feel it was in His Cards to die like that,, at that moment pure silver appeared out of a card tattoo on my forearm, and I Immediately went into full spirit, and so did my mom, I heard only two things in my head, the sounds of Angels Laughter and a man Yelling HALLELUYAH! My mom, sisters, and dad all witnessed some kind of energy field that surrounded my Body, they said it looked like the kinda Mirage you see off hot black top, I never seen it and never cared to, what I actually felt... just stompped, what they was saying about it haha..
      At the end of the Exp. Everyone in the house fell asleep mid day, and my family dont nap lol...but before I fell asleep, I seen a picture of me(in my mind) kinda busting thru the doors of a church, middle service, disrupting with a authority type thing.
      All that happend in 2015, Ive now recently been given back everything, and better than before! Praise The Most High. 
      Now I didnt understand what that light vision meant at all, at that time,..but its been revealed to me over this last year, I got hit with tons of truths concerning the Bible and the Church as a whole. 
      And I can say its most definitely gonna be "disruptive" to majority of The Church. 
      That is IF they would like to get off the Industrial train(uncomfortable,not meant for human passengers,but you can still reach your destination) and get aboard The train He has Made for human passengers with a comfortable travel all the way home..
      There is really alot of stuff within all this...but one I'd like to touch on first would be Keeping of The Sabbath, Its a very amazing and a sad thing, that very Few Followers actually try to keep the Sabbath,
      #1. Its our Law to do so,
      #2. Man, I clda really used that amazing self discipline my entire life,which is likea auto blessing that is tied to the Sabbath. Haha
      3. The Father Himself sanctified it,made it Holy, and gave it to us as a Gift to his Followers, its a Holy rest he wants us to partake in with him, and its been basically forgotten within the Catholic and Christian churches.
      We know this is a important law were supposed to Keep, even when The Messiah was put in the tomb, no visitors came on Sabbath, bc the law and all laws did and still do to this day remain intact, only changes that was done to The Law was sacrificial and ceremonial, yes that means its still not lawful to eat pork, but were not supposed to condemn anyone about what they do or dont eat, your made perfect thru the Messiah, so what you eat isnt 0f great importance anymore, but it is still The Law to not eat any unclean beast, ive searched every scripture concerning the food ordeal lol imma hungry guy.. and its def. Still apart of the law, Just knowone is to be condemned about it, but make no mistake, its a GOOD thing to not even touch those unclean animals, but if you condemn som1 for eating pork or etc.. your good deed will be turned into a evil one...
      But Sabbath now thats a different story and its something we all should rejoice in together every week from Friday night to saturday night.  And it should be taught to our children, and you should start working on Sundays and Stop working on Saturdays. The word Sabbath means Rest or to cease, Hebrews in new testament explains we should try our utemost to keep that sabbath. 
      If anyone has any questions for me at all, id enjoy digging into all of this, my question would be how is it, all these life long followers are overlooking so much in the word? Another ex. Paul said I believe in Corinthians it was, that while a man is praying or prophsying, He is NOT to cover his head, and if he does cover his head he dishonors The Messiah, and that a woman IS supposed to cover her head while praying and prophsying and if she dosent, then she dishonors Man..says The head of the woman is man, the head of man is The Messiah and The Head of The Messiah is YHWH or The Father.. replaced with The false title the Lord in most versions.
    • By Jonathan Dane
      I recently had a post taken down. The reason stated was that I was "speaking evil of a leader." In point of fact, I had posted asking for scriptural reasons why a current leader could not be the Antichrist (I confessed that I believed him to be.) No proof of a lack of biblical qualification was offered that this leader could "not" be whom I claimed he was. A few supported me.

      Yet, one individual stated that Scripture commands us to respect those in authority -- something I was evidently violating. I was simply wrong "in principle" because I'm not  "allowed" to do that. He went so far as to quote from the TOS: "Disrespectful or threatening comments toward governmental institutions and/or world leaders will not be tolerated. (1 Pet. 2:13-17)"

      If the reason for the censor is a violation of the TOS, may I just point out that I did not make a disrespectful or threatening "comment" about this world leader, as the rules specifically state. NOT ONE. I simply expressed a "belief" about him, i.e. that he was the Antichrist. To my recollection, I made no offensive or disparaging comments about him. My tone was very serious and weighty, for the most part.

      A Christian forum's "terms of service" should be grounded in Scripture and administered consistently and not hypocritically. I would like to examine 1 Peter 2:13-17, to see what it says, what it doesn't, and what, if any, historical particulars might influence the application of the passage.

      "Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. 16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor." (1 Peter 2:13-17)

      The TOS interprets this verse to mean Christians do not have the right to express an opinion on the forum that may be construed as "disrespectful" towards one in authority. My first thought is that this sounds profoundly un-American. This kind of thought control seems more akin to China than the U.S.

      Apparently, the implication is this: Since my statement is dishonoring to our leader and the Bible says "Honor the king" ; therefore I'm in sin. But is that really what this passage says? Not at all. 
        Historical-grammatical interpretation demands that we examine each and every text within its proper "context," both in terms of its historical background and internal grammar.

      This passage above lists two groups: 1.) evil-doers 2.) do-gooders

      Yes, we are to submit to and honor those in authority. That is not in question. But what is the context of that submission? What is this honor and what does it look like? Is it talking about our theological opinions of a person or even an opinion of a leader's character? Where does it say that in the text? I neither see it in that passage, nor in the Romans 13 passage -- it's not there. Who are these people that do not "honor the king?" Are they Christians with an opinion? We don't have to guess. The text tells us. THEY ARE LAW BREAKERS --  EVIL DOERS. We honor the king by living in accordance to the law of the land. THAT is what the text says. Verse 14 says that authority is sent by God "to punish those who do evil."  Verse 16 says, "Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God."  

      Clearly, the focus of 1 Peter 2 is living "lawfully" (rightly) in society as a testimony in order to silence men who would unrighteously judge Christ's Church (Christians). It is a call to "live within the law;"  to "live beyond reproof". It is not some mystical power or honor given to a King, but rather an admonishment to live in accordance to the ordinances of civil law. But doesn't verse 17 say "Honor the Emperor (king)?" Yes -- but it also says, "Honor everyone." So, if we cannot call a spade a spade in regards to a king, then contextually, we can never call ANYONE an evil or corrupt or bad person. Charles Manson, Anton Lavey, and Hitler may have done some bad things, but we cannot call them evil, bad or wicked people. This kind of reasoning is absurd and not supported by either passage.

      After the post was taken down, I was told: "In the 1st century -- Nero was a type of AC and he persecuted believers in the worst way possible -- and yet you don't read so much about him in the Church Fathers."

      This is where the historical context must be closely considered. In the 1st century, an unsavory statement written about the Caesar was considered a crime of treason and punishable by death. Of course they didn't write negative statements regarding his character; not if they valued their life. If you wrote anything disparaging to the emperor, you were, in fact, a law breaker. (In America, we have something called the 1st Amendment which safeguards, in particular, religious free speech.) Even so, the apostle John boldly wrote that: "now many antichrists have come." (1 John 2:18), He did not cower to call a spade a spade. And neither do I.

      There does appear to be a degree of inconsistency at best and hypocrisy at worse when it comes to the enforcement of this supposed biblical principle. I'll spare you the direct quotes in lieu of suggesting that a mere search for the word, "OBAMA", in this forum will provide a SWATH of comparisons of him to the beast. The Pope also garners a lot of insults. I find it fascinating that my post was removed while those posts were allowed to stay. Recall also that my post was just asking folks to refute my conclusions. The posts on Obama and others were actually providing evidence from Scripture that they were indeed antichrists. According to the administrator (who was very nice, I might add), the post was about to be automatically pulled because of the amount of complaints. Is it just possible that when it comes to a Leftist like Obama, we are quick to "tolerate" moral criticism. Yet, when it comes to someone on our side, well...that's seen as "talking evil" about them.

      Let me clear up something. This is not "sport" for me. I was not looking for the Antichrist. I have never considered ANYONE previously as a contender - no one. I am not an "end of the world" fanatic or some conspiracy loon. I don't attend prophecy conferences. In fact, I haven't bought a prophecy book in over 20 years. 

      That said, on March 25, 2016 I was t-boned out of nowhere by the Holy Spirit. I sat down at a computer and typed FURIOUSLY for 3 1/2 months with just my index fingers. When I was done, I had what I believe to be the most exhaustive book ever written on the Antichrist. I pulled from nearly 1000 Scripture verses. I am not a "charismatic" but I have seen the power of God -- marvelous things. When I wrote that book, I knew with certainty that a particular man was going to be elected, not once, but twice. And I wrote about it. I repeat, this is not a game. Trust me when I say that my book is not some inane adding up of a person's name to get 666.

      Recall, the reason for the post's delete was because I was deemed "speaking evil of a leader." But what is speaking evil of someone? This link may help: https://biblehub.com/topical/e/evil-speaking.htm Is it not meant to do them harm? -- usually through some kind of slander? Again, I was challenging people to dismiss my views from Scripture. Instead, what I  got was, "You're wrong ." I ask, "Why am I wrong?" Answer: "Because you talked evil." Why do you say I was talking evil? Answer: "Because you were wrong." But fact is, I'm only "wrong" if I'm "wrong." In other words, if I'm wrong as in incorrect, then yes, I've committed a serious wrong. But if I'm right, now what? I am certain I am right and have good reason for that certainty.
      We are to honor all people, including the king, that we may live in peace. This is practical advice for our comfort -- "so that you may live peaceably." That said, there are times in history when men must forgo comfort to speak up against evil and the men behind it.

      If the Peter passage implies that men should just shut up and never point the finger towards unrighteous leaders, how do we explain the great prophets, judges and writers in the Bible that spoke up against evil rulers? The Bible is chalked full of them, from Moses, down through the prophets, to John the Baptist, forward to such men as the Apostles who said, "We must obey God rather than men." How about Nathan pointing his finger at David saying, "YOU ARE THE MAN!" Psalm 26:5 says, "I hate the assembly of evildoers, and I will not sit with the wicked." 

      We are to honor men. But we are also to hate evil. Ephesians 5:11 says, "Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them." Yes, we are called to love our enemies. But the Bible does not say, "Do not consider them your enemies." Someone asked me if I respected this leader (the subject of my deleted post.) My response was, "I would bet that I have a deeper, more profound respect for him than you do." I know who he is and what he'll do. I can have a respect for greatness, whether it be good or evil. I respect the man. I hate the monster, especially the monster that he'll become.

      What if I'm wrong? Well, for starters, I stand in good company. In fact, the great men of the faith, from the 1st century, through to the Reformation all had their designated, antichrists. Martin Luther, John Calvin all the way through to people like Jonathan Edwards considered the Pope to be the Antichrist. I have a copy of a Geneva Bible. The marginal notation mentions the antichrist of popery. They didn't refer to him as a type, but called him the Antichrist. Recall, the apostle John said there were antichrists in his day. Even today, sermons are preached calling out the evils of anti-Christian dictators. Some have gone as far as to take up arms to stand up against evil leaders. (I have never called for this.) Did our founding fathers commit evil against King George? Did Dietrich Bonhoeffer commit evil in standing with Christians in Germany to try to take down Hitler?

      Some may argue that my present-day antichrist has yet to commit evil acts. My response would be this: 1.) I could argue that he has committed evil. 2.) Because I am certain of this man's role, I know the evil he will commit. In God's eyes (assuming I am correct), he's already guilty of it.

      The point I want to make is this: The Bible lays out a Christian standard of living and conduct. But the Antichrist is unique. He is the penultimate embodiment of all the previous wicked leaders in history. He is evil manifest. When it comes to the Antichrist, even the admonitions to honor the ruler will go out the window at some point. I am not saying we've arrived there yet.
       
      If claiming someone is the Antichrist amounts to "speaking evil,", what about those who resist him during the tribulation? If they reject the mark, they are rejecting the man. Won't they be speaking evil of him by default? Again, speaking evil has at its center: FALSEHOOD. They won't be speaking evil because they will be speaking truth. And truth is never evil - that is unless it is being spoken for sordid reason e.g. for money, power or slander.

      I am solidly convinced that I AM speaking the truth. I am not doing this to hurt the man. My Lord, in my opinion, he's invincible until Christ returns. And from what I know of him, I think he would rather enjoy being called the first dictator of the world, evil or not.

      Bottom line
      -- I see NO biblical justification to pull my post. 
      -- I see a different standard whether the object of our critique represents the political Right versus the Left.
      -- I am not an evil doer (law breaker).
      -- I am certain my conclusion is true and of the Lord.
      -- I will continue to attempt to post on here, as long as the Lord permits.
      -- I am convinced that those who mock my conclusion will soon mock no more.    1 Peter 2:15 "For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people." That is what I believe I have done and will continue to do.
        In my next post -- the profile of a man.
    • By Omegaman 3.0
      Daily Reading 37 If you prefer, you can look up the following verses in your own Bible, of by whatever means and in whatever version you choose. Hebrews 2     Genesis 46:28-47:31 Psalm 37 Audio 2:47              Audio 4:47 Audio 4:21 The above addresses are linked to Bible Gateway. That is an easy way to read (or listen to) the Bible verses, and choose your version.  Personally, I prefer written, that way I can go at my own pace, on think about it, before moving on. Nothing wrong with doing either or both. The Bible says faith comes by hearing. See the picture below to get an idea of what to expect if you follow the above links.

      Note: The audio will not play the exact verses, it will play the whole chapters, in which the verses exist.
      Thank you Lord for making the your word so accessible for us in these times. Amen

    • By Michael37
      The TOTKOGAE was in the Garden of Eden, that is the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil.
      Gen 2:9
      (9)  And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
      In the above verse the wording is general, referring only to "knowledge of good and evil", but in the verse below the wording is specific, referring to "the knowledge of good and evil".

      Gen 2:16-17
      (16)  And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat:
      (17)  But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it: for in the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die.
       
      We have the phrase "ignorance is bliss" and it was bliss for Adam and Eve before they gained knowledge of good and evil. We are not told the extent of the knowledge of good and evil that they gained from eating of the TOTKOGAE, but we can be sure it was experiential. They knew they were guilty of disobeying God and were ashamed now that they had lost their covering of innocence and the countdown was on for their bodies to age and die.
      A FAQ is "Why was the TOTKOGAE in the Garden of Eden where it was accessible to Adam and Eve?"
      I believe its inclusion was integral to God's relationship with Adam and Eve, and by implication with His Creation. Good and evil were of course known to God but since He had previously declared all aspects of His Creation as good this was the only experience He desired for all things to have. Satan of course had other plans. From the beginning of Creation Satan's evil desires meant God was confronted with opposition, and meant His Creation was exposed to the possibility of experiencing the conflict that opposition to Him always brings. I believe the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil refers us to the Omniscience of God and introduces us to His provision to deal with all that opposes Him in order to ensure the victory of good over evil.   
      John 8:44
      (44)  You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
       
    • By Aim316
      Amongst all the chaos in our lives. Media coverage, social networks, we are trampled over by negative. What are the good things in life? What is good? And what is good focusing our attention on? Also how to separate bad beginnings from blessed endings when pondering a good life. 
×
×
  • Create New...