Human Nature

Pico

Pico

Well-Known Member
Messages
273
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
California
In Genesis 3 Eve tells the serpent that "God said not to eat or touch the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden." But God did not say that she couldn't touch it. Just not to eat it.

I know this says something very important about human nature, but I don't know what it is. Any thoughts?
 
Pico said:
In Genesis 3 Eve tells the serpent that "God said not to eat or touch the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden." But God did not say that she couldn't touch it. Just not to eat it.

I know this says something very important about human nature, but I don't know what it is. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...




But as for [eating] of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘YOU must not eat from it, no, YOU must not touch it that YOU do not die.GENESIS 3;3


The tree of knowledge was a literal tree. However, it represented God’s right as Ruler to decide what is good and bad for his human creation. To eat from the tree, therefore, was not just an act of theft—taking that which belonged to God—but also a presumptuous grasp at moral independence, or self-determination.
 
mee said:
But as for [eating] of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘YOU must not eat from it, no, YOU must not touch it that YOU do not die.GENESIS 3;3


The tree of knowledge was a literal tree. However, it represented God’s right as Ruler to decide what is good and bad for his human creation. To eat from the tree, therefore, was not just an act of theft—taking that which belonged to God—but also a presumptuous grasp at moral independence, or self-determination.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that.

Eating of the tree was a direct violation of God's commandment. But I'm not talking about that at all. What I'm referring to is Eve saying that God said not to eat of, or even touch it, when He only said not to eat from it.
 
To touch something is external, to eat something is to internalise it.

For example, to kill someone is a sin ... To watch someone being killed is external to the self — you do not take part in the act — but it is still a sin.

In the same way, watching pornography is as bas as taking part in the acts you are watching.

Take a look at the discourse on the Beatitudes in Matthew 5.

Thomas
 
Hi,
Isn't it human nature to change a story just a bit every time it gets told?
Joe
 
Joedjr said:
Hi,
Isn't it human nature to change a story just a bit every time it gets told?
Joe
Click to expand...
Exactly and we don't know who told Eve!! She said G!d said, but it isn't written. In Gen 1 G!d told her and Adam to eat any of any fruit bearing tree, no exceptions. In Gen2 Eve wasn't around when G!d told Adam, so the telephone game could have started when Adam told Eve what G!d said, and what Eve told the snake was heresay!
 
Hi,
To add another thought, there might not be really anything to the differences. If you subscribe to the work of Richard Elliott and have interest in the Documentary Hypothesis, you might think it's just the way authors of Genesis were able to gather together the text.
Joe
 
IMO, I think Eve added the part of touching the fruit because she was trying to distance herself as much as possible in a fruitless effort (pardon the pun) to avoid the temptation. It ended up being a form of legalism. The problem is that she was already in contemplation, which is almost too late. I'm reminded of James 1:14-15:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."

Once you get to a certain point with temptation it is nearly impossible to pull back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top