| Author | Message | ||
| Truman Registered user Username: Truman Post Number: 135 Registered: 1-2012 |
I have a question, initially for Doc, since he reminded me of a text I have never understood. I would love to hear from anyone else as well. Genesis 3:22 (NIV): And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." Doc, your comment about Satan's first lie reminded me of this text. Exactly how did Adam and Eve become like God? Was it because they sinned, so in a sense they had "seen" both good and evil? Or, was there something about the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that gave them the ability to be like God in some way? Was God really concerned that they might then eat from the Tree of Life and live forever? Thanks Doc, I always enjoy reading your views, especially on subjects or texts that are over my head! | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13644 Registered: 12-2003  |
Truman, I'm eager to hear Doc's explanation as well. I believe, though, that the fact that Adam and Eve know evil as well as good put them into a new category. They were not naive, and they now knew/would know the facts of sin. God already knew the facts of sin; He's outside of time. He knew it ALL before He even created the world. But now Adam and Eve are no longer innocent. They are fully plunged into the consequences of spiritual death. So I do not believe God meant that in some way A and E shared the attributes of divinity; rather, they knew the bigger picture that previously only a sovereign God could see. Just FYI, here's an interesting commentary on Gen. 3:22-24 from the ESV Study Bible:
It's interesting to think about the implications of the cherubim over the mercy seat, the place where God put His glory. When Jesus died, the curtain keeping those cherubim and the mercy seat hidden was torn, exposing the most holy place to view. The PLACE was no longer holy. The Lord Jesus is holy, and now He tabernacles in His people. So in the new covenant, God's people are again the guardians of God's glory. Interesting. Colleen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1686 Registered: 7-2003  |
Since Doc hasn't responded as of yet, I thought I might take a crack at this. I've heard my pastor preach on this several times and think his approach makes much sense. God does not "know" evil in the sense of having committed sin and fallen man does not really "know" true Good, so that can't be what the text is saying. So in what way does God know evil and man know good? God knows evil in the sense that He defines that which is Good and that which is Evil. God is the ultimate standard of Good and everything that is not in accordance with His nature is evil. What happened when Eve chose to eat the forbidden fruit is that she decided herself what would be good for her, rather than allowing God to define what was good and evil. So in a sense, she chose to become her own god defining what is good according to her own standards. Mankind has been involved in this same struggle ever since. We are always pulled between allowing God to be God versus being our own god. Our entire modern culture is built around choosing what's right for you, making no truth claims for anyone else, and never ever judging the actions or beliefs of another. Basically, in our culture, everyone is their own god. We have all become like God in that we all now think we know best what is good and what it evil. Interestingly, even in the Church (not to mention this forum) we often struggle to let God define what is and isn't good. Imagine how the debate around topics like homosexuality, male/female roles, and Hell would change if we started with trying to accurately answer the question "What has God said?" (regardless of what I think or want) vs. starting with "What do I think?" then backing into Scripture to support it. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1871 Registered: 7-2004  |
yes the theme has a very familiar ring to it. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13652 Registered: 12-2003 |
What a great explanation. And I love your conclusion, Chris:
Colleen | ||
| Truman Registered user Username: Truman Post Number: 137 Registered: 1-2012 |
Colleen, Chris, and Rick, thanks for the explanations and comments. Any thoughts on the concern (seemingly) expressed by God that man might eat from the Tree of Life and live forever? And, Paging Doc Adrian...  When or if you have time, I am still interested in "hearing" your perspective on this. | ||
| Adiusa Registered user Username: Adiusa Post Number: 1 Registered: 4-2012 |
Hi there all, I'm trying my hand here on my first post., just because I was actually pondering around this subject for the last 2 weeks after I read in the last issue of Proclamation, in Colleen's article: "..Thus "they began to die" is the only way Adventism can explain that Adam and Eve didn’t cease to breathe the day they ate the fruit. In fact, Adventism’s explanation actually sounds a bit like Satan’s deception: they didn’t actually die that day - but they began to die."... All previous comments are right on, great job. Myself also was left with the Tree of Life needed explaining. So I asked "What did it happen at the Fall of Man?" I started to read about it, I would go to sleep with this thought, I would wake up in the morning with this thought. It was in my mind continuosly. I brought this Tree of Life issue with Colleen at our last Bible study but didn't have time to go to deep, and somehow we ended up at the dichotomy vs trichotomy issue. Which you will see why. After much meditation on the issue what I discovered was an explanation of the Trinity and how man was created in God's likeness: body, soul and spirit. Let's recap: The first event at the Tree of Knowledge, by A&E choice the apple got eaten, BAM! we became dead in spirit, disconected from God's spirit. The second event involved the Tree of Life, by God's choice, BAM! "no more eternity for you" (for your body actualy - because the salvation plan was already in place to redeem the spirit and thus the body). As we know, Adam took a long time to die off, having still a perfect body as initially created. It was so perfect that he could have children that could intermarry, unlike later on, when genetical defects are more prone to occur due to the degradation of the creation and the body. So Tree of Life ban was necessary so that we don't live forever! Which means we could, even with a dead spirit, wouldn't it? Is just that God can't tolerate neverending sin. So he takes the action that actually kills the body. Further on, God even limits our life to 120, in the the post-flood conditions but that's another issue. So, this is my humble attempt to explain the Fall of Man and the Tree of Life: Tree of knowledge is forbidden = abide in the SPIRIT of God. Tree of life access = abide in unrestricted, Live giving LOVE of God the Father. Now when BOTH of these are gone, the body slowly returns to dust in phisical death. Gen 3:19. So here I presumed the presence of the 2 persons of the trinity in us: Holy Spirit and God the Father-Live giver through the breath of life. Both were alive in us (connected with God) before the fall and both were preserved through the 2 trees. Both need restoration through the new birth: of the spirit first, then after the resurrection the soul with the new body. Then we will have access again to the Tree of Life, as explained in the last chapters in Revelation. But where is the Son in this picture? We know Body = dust. So here is the trick to find the Son, Jesus. Dust is made out of chemical elements which are made out atoms and so on, until you reach the first day of creation when LIGHT was all there was. Wasn't Jesus called the Light of the World and "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made."? Doesn't this makes Jesus = The Light of the first day of creation? I know this opens another discussion of Ex-nihilo vs Ex-Deo, but bear with me. It all comes full circle on how nice you can explain "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" and present the trinity to SDA, to JW, to Muslims and all who deny the Trinity: He used dust (Light from Jesus) to create the body that is let's say pre-programmed to abide in God (Spirit from HS sustained by not eating from the Tree of Knowledge) and he breathed in us Life (Love from the Father, sustained by the Tree of Life). So we are as the Bible say in one place: spirit, soul and body. God is Spirit, Love and Light, or Holy Spirit, Father and Son. It just so happen that my wife didn't quite understood the Trinity and when I put it like this it made sense for her. I have more ramifications that come from this picture: Isn't it interesting that the unforgivable sin is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, kind of going back to the Tree of knowledge? Is the universe created in the trinity likeness: Matter, Laws (Phisics and Moral), Life (on Earth)? (Ex-Nihilo vs Ex-Deo.) Isn't Man able to create like the Trinity? To make a cake you need ingredients, recipe and love. Yes, the more love or passion you put in, the better it tastes. If Adam stopped eating from the Tree of Life for whatever reason, he forgot, or something, wouldn't he ended up dead? Does it helps us understand the nature of Jesus the Man better and get rid of that "he could have sinned" blasphemy? I see the mystery of the 2 spiritual components but can't we embrace trichotomy the same way we embrace TRI-nity? Of course there was a debate over the Trinity long time ago that caused the Great Schism of the church over the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father only vs. from the Father and The Son. Hope I was clear and wasn't all over the place, it is late, past 2AM. Can't stop thinking about it. Any questions I'll try to answer. I need a debate to sort this out. Am I in the wrong? -Adi (also Adrian, from Romania) Pasadena, CA | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1689 Registered: 7-2003 |
At the risk of starting a heated debate (hopefully not) I'll share a minority view on what God says about the Tree of Life in Genesis 3:
So when the Bible uses language like, "stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" and "So...He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword... to guard the way to the tree of life." I don't know how to take it other than to think that if man continued to eat from the tree then he would live forever so God guarded the tree from man so that wouldn't happen. This could fit with the view that this universe was created with the 2nd law of thermodynamics as a fundamental part of the universe. To put it in more biblical terms, this universe was subjected to decay from the very beginning. Plants died and decayed, animals died and decayed, but man did not because he ate of the tree of life. If he had continued to eat of the tree of life he would have lived forever, but when he was blocked from the tree of life he began to experience physical decay and eventually physical death. This happened not because of some fundamental change in the laws of physics or the nature of the universe, but because man no longer had access to the tree. I just want to stress that this is nothing more than a theory and one that can't be proved. I am not in the least dogmatic about it and don't intend to start an extended argument. It's just something to think about and is perhaps a new idea that some will find interesting. Take it for what it's worth....perhaps not much. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1690 Registered: 7-2003 |
In rereading this post, I'm not sure I was very clear about the central hypothesis. In brief, "The Tree of Life may have had a life sustaining function that was not innate to man's nature, before or after the fall." | ||
| Mkfound Registered user Username: Mkfound Post Number: 186 Registered: 1-2011 |
I have a question that I've been thinking about recently, and the above posts by Adi and Chris just brought it to the forefront of my mind. We have an immune system composed of white blood cells, thymus gland, lymph nodes, etc. I guess my question was--were Adam and Eve made with these. If so, what did they need them for? If not, when did our immune system kick in? Can this even be answered from the Bible? I always took for granted that Adam and Eve lived in a perfect world with no death, disease, etc. I did wonder though what happened to used banana peels that they ate from. Did they just have a huge pile of peels and other parts of fruit they didn't eat? Did they then have a huge mound of what we would call compost, which wasn't actually composting? Yes, these are the strange things that I ponder on. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1873 Registered: 7-2004 |
Wow Chris, that leaves plenty to think about. Truman, We studied Genesis in our Formers study group and spent two weeks discussing various opinions and options regarding the two trees. While it seemed that some answers fit better with our overall understanding of the Bible than others, we really had to conclude that we were digging beyond the details given to us and had to satisfy ourselves with possible answers rather than certainty ones. I think it is important to distinguish spiritual death (we are dead in our trespasses) from physical death. It is probably equally important to distinguish spiritual life from physical life. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13657 Registered: 12-2003 |
Chris, for what it's worth, I have come to almost the same conclusion. The part that I had not thought of was the rest of creation being subject to the law of thermodynamics. That does seem plausible...and it does fit within the Romans 8:20-23 statement that God subjected all creation to decay. Certainly something seems to be different in the Garden than outside the Garden. Certainly sin did not surprise God. At the same time, I can see that it's also possible that God bound all creation to decay at the time He cursed the ground in Genesis 3—in some way even the Garden was changed. And yet, physical existence was made possible, pre-sin, by the Tree of Life and prevented from being eternal by the removal of the Tree. Either way, I do understand the Tree of Life to be something that humanity required in order to sustain physical life. It also shows up again in Revelation. I believe Adrian's point above (welcome, Adrian!), that the idea that the Trinity is implied in the creation of man in that man has a body (related to Jesus who created it as the original Light of the world), a spirit from the Holy Spirit, and a soul that abides in the Love of the Father to be quite beautiful but perhaps less than convincing. (We discussed this last Friday, Adrian...so you know what I'm going to say! ) I believe we have to take Scripture quite literally; in other words, we must read it in the normal way we read literature. We can't read meanings or conclusions into the words that we can't support from the text. Rick is right, I believe, that we can't dogmatically conclude anything beyond what the text says, and it is very incomplete! It has told us just what we need to know in order to understand our condition and to understand that God does what He says and provides whatever is needed for us to know Him and have life. I don't believe we can conclude that man is tri-partite as opposed to bi-partite based on the symbols of the trees in the garden and the original Light. We CAN know, from Scripture, that the Trinity was involved in creation. We CAN know we are made in God's image, and we CAN know that man could not have spiritual life after disobeying His word, nor could he have physical immortality apart from the Tree of Life--whatever that was/is. Adrian, I believe one of the issues here is that the real way Adventism warps the nature of man is in denying he has an immaterial spirit. Adventism says that man's spirit is simply his breath, a "life force" like electricity, that animates the body while a person breathes, but when a person ceases to breathe, that breath/life force/electricity ceases to animate the body and disappears, exactly as the breath in our nostrils disappears, or as electricity leaves a turned-off lamp. Adventist claims that humans ARE "living souls" but do not HAVE souls. Therefore, when they die, the living soul dies with the body, and the spirit (breath) goes back to God. There is nothing separate and immaterial that survives the body. (Read the explanation in Seventh-day Adventists Believe, the book explaining the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. We can't "metaphorize" or "spiritualize" the words of Scripture beyond what their plain meaning will support. Very interesting post above, Chris. Interestingly, last Friday Richard and I were discussing this issue from a slightly different "angle", and Richard said something I thought was quite profound: "God created the human body to be able to withstand sin for a time." He knew sin would come; He knew its full effects on matter. He created the world (or bound it later...whichever!) to be able to exist in spite of sin—but He removed the possibility that man would live in the world indefinitely and exponentially multiply his sin for an indefinite lifetime. Colleen | ||
| Adiusa Registered user Username: Adiusa Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2012 |
Colleen, so much can be said about these. One quick thought regarding thermodinamics and the decay. The universe was created with the second law of thermodinamics and at the fall God removed the endless supply of energy needed to avoid the decay (entropy increase). In other words, the universe is no longer a perpetuum mobile because it lost the endless supply of energy at the fall. Probably that was the kill switch Richard thought of. -Adi | ||
| Adiusa Registered user Username: Adiusa Post Number: 3 Registered: 4-2012 |
Forgot to add that Chris said the same thing basically. The laws of TD apply to CLOSED systems. Our universe is huge but with a limit, closed. The only limiless, not closed system is God. You need 2nd law of TD in a closed system to perform mechanical work and for the heat to flow from hot to cold, digestion and so on. -Adi. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 2599 Registered: 7-2007 |
Adiusa; welcome to the forum! | ||
| Mjcmcook Registered user Username: Mjcmcook Post Number: 489 Registered: 2-2011 |
~Adiusa ~WELCOME~ to the Forum ! ~mj~ | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 1004 Registered: 7-2008  |
From Colleen post.... "Very interesting post above, Chris. Interestingly, last Friday Richard and I were discussing this issue from a slightly different "angle", and Richard said something I thought was quite profound: "God created the human body to be able to withstand sin for a time." He knew sin would come; He knew its full effects on matter. He created the world (or bound it later...whichever!) to be able to exist in spite of sin—but He removed the possibility that man would live in the world indefinitely and exponentially multiply his sin for an indefinite lifetime." God knew sin would come?.... Does this mean that God had no say or control concerning the appearance of sin into the universe He would create?? Just asking for purpose of enhancing the discussion. ...Animal. the curious one | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 710 Registered: 2-2003  |
Hi all, I just got round to reading this thread. Lots of interesting thoughts. Sorry to disappoint, but I have not really considered this text in depth, and I don't have anything significant to add to what has already been said. Just a couple of thoughts. The concept of "becoming like one of us" is specifically linked with the idea of "knowing good and evil" in this verse, so I guess it must be understood in those terms. I checked a few commentaries, but did not find much. One idea I liked, was that when God expelled Adam and Eve from the garden, so they would not eat of the tree of life, was well as being a judgement, it was also a redemptive act. This would be typical of God's judgements in later times too, like, God exiled the people of Israel to Babylon as a judgement for their sin, but also so they would repent and turn back to him. Anyway, in this case, God exiled Adam and Eve from the garden so they would become aware of the fact that they had lost their relationship with him and would realise their need to seek him. If they had stayed in the garden, they would think it was perfectly OK for them to continue as they were physically, even though they were in rebellion against God, and they would not even think they had to change. Just another side of the "living for ever in a sinful condition" idea. Sorry I couldn't really come up with anything more specific. Another Adrian, from the UK Living in Hungary | ||
| Adiusa Registered user Username: Adiusa Post Number: 4 Registered: 4-2012 |
Hi all, thanks, it's good to be here. Hi Adrian of UK . I'll be calling myself Adi so people won't confuse us, I was already asked at the FAF Week if I'm the one from the forum. Adi is my name my mom and people back in Romanian called me. If you want to pronounce it it will be A as in house and D I as in Di-nner. Animal: of course God knew. There are only a few things God doesn't know and you can find them if you google "things God doesn't know". Hint: they are all positive. And don't worry, He did have a say, we just don't see the result yet. Back to where the discussion brought us. One of the explanations I found that dismisses tricotomy is tied to the aspect of spirit worship: "The trichotomist view is typically used to support the idea that God communicates mystically with our spirits and thus bypasses our intellects. " and "this false teaching leads people to swallow other false and destructive heresies" (as found here http://equip.org/perspectives/body-soul-and-spirit-monism-dichotomy-or-trichotomy/ ). So this is referring to the charismatic manifestation. This is where I have a problem. I know this is quicksand territory because the charismatic manifestation is so misrepresented and misunderstood. I cringe to the fact that the Church is so divided over this, and I understand why, due to the Pentecostal movement, which I agree, it totally goes against what Paul was writing in 1 Corinthians 14. I like the sermons of John MacArthur but his position on tongues to mean only "a foreign language" is totally off. I found it beautifully explained by Derek Prince. Getting the 3 parts associated with the trees and the dust is a bit of metaphor I agree, but the main Biblical support is found in in many other texts of the Bible, mainly in "worship with my body, spirit and soul". 3 distinct styles of worship. And on this I can speak from experience because it happened to me. I can testify that if I wouldn't have experienced the spirit worship, I wouldn't be here today, I would be a Sabbath keeper. My intellect/soul would still struggle over the issue and maybe would have taken another decision. I know many of us are born again by intellectual reasoning, but I tell you, in my case the nail in the coffin was put by the Holly Spirit. "Flesh and bones" cannot reveal the Deity unless from above, as Jesus "congratulated" Peter. "Flesh and bones" would want to be convinced intellectually by seeing the wounds of the cross, as Thomas did. So I embrace trichotomy due to the fact that allows me to worship in spirit apart from my intellect, which by the way, it didn't happen to me again in the past 8 years, but I know is there and true. Getting busy with life can't move you in the spirit. To me it happened only when I was fasting, my soul was broken, I was at my lowest point in life when I cried out to the Lord, "save me!"... AND other persons were praying for me, and yes, they were tongue speakers. I don't need trichotomy to prove the spirit worship, spirit worship proves trichotomy. I didn't even believe in it until the day it happened to me, I didn't even asked for it, I thought the same way: it was the ability to speak a foreign language and was given only for the apostolic time. I could go on explaining it from the bible but other people are doing it much better than me - I already mentioned Derek Prince. I'm here just to testify what happened to me and if this can benefit to somebody to grow in the Lord, so be it. I don't want to convince nobody of anything. The ministry to the SDA is a spiritual battle that cannot be fought ONLY with reasoning and preaching, which is done so wonderfully here. We need the "magic bullet" as Colleen put it the Wretched Radio interview. That magic bullet is spiritual intercession to the Holly Spirit by our spirit, prayer and crying out to the Lord with our spirits, in my opinion. How that is done is open to discussion, but it MUST be done, otherwise we are talking to dead people - with both meanings of the word DEAD: they can't hear us and the majority of them are dead spiritual. In His grace -Adi. | ||
| Adiusa Registered user Username: Adiusa Post Number: 5 Registered: 4-2012 |
Adrian, I liked the "expelling" explanation but didn't understand what you mean by: "The concept of "becoming like one of us" is specifically linked with the idea of "knowing good and evil" in this verse, so I guess it must be understood in those terms." If you could expand it. I only know we were supposed to know and do the "good" and let God with his infinite power "know" and deal with "evil". We are not gods, we can't deal with evil. The minute we see a sign "Don't touch this" we WANT to touch it just to see what would happen. -Adi |
