I would like to restrict giving God any other attribute except for knowing good and evil in this thread. Just for simplicity.
I have two quotes I would like you to consider.
Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil.
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Knowing good and evil is the same as developing or gaining a moral sense. This is something that all governments and religions wish to develop in us and seems like a good idea to me.
If being perfect like God means that we must have the knowledge of good and evil, then Adam and Eve had to eat of the tree of knowledge ---- if they were to accomplish what most seem to think is a worthy goal. Morals. As God says in Eden, such is to have your eyes opened. A good thing IOW.
In the Jewish view, A & E did the right thing and they name it our elevation. In the Christian view, they did the wrong thing and call it our fall.
Is becoming as Gods, in the moral sense, good or evil?
If evil, please explain what is evil about developing a moral sense and following scriptures that tell us to be as Gods.
What do you mean is becoming like god good or evil?
July 5 2012, 6:00 PM
That's like asking is being able to breath a good or a bad thing.
The point is not, of course, whether it is one or the other, "the point" is you already are.
just because you do not realize you are immortal doesn't mean you are not
rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : falsifiability
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -
I am asking nicely for the 'regulars' who don't want to consider my POV to please not read or answer this one:
Im trying to engage only those who are considering how nature evolves into MAN
while nature is always ONE, it is not always MAN,
as a matter of fact NATURE IS just now being FORMED into man by her own development, her own purpose
as was foretold by those who understood these things thousands of years ago and religion was created from their understanding as they PLUNGED the dephts of nature "within their own nature' which is where the depths are revealed
not in laboratries, but within the exprience of consciousness
all language is developed by those who are considered mankind but in truth, language has a very obscure origin: It seems to have arrived with ancients cultures around 6000 years ago even though primitive man had his own form of communication;
all animals communicate but a 'system' of langauge came about in a way we don't fully understand........till it arrived on the scene
yet it is written the WORD was from the beginning and it was the light of the "LIFE" of Man ...........and it is GOD.....the program of nature
natures program is so precises that we can't decode it with the ego but only through either scientific experiments with nature (including our own bodies) or the experience of NATURE (through the brain through which we experience consciousness):
which brings me to the term 'man"; who made it up? Obviously those who brought the WORD that includes the term; otherwise we don't know what man really means:
if nature defines man then nature must know what MAN means as nature knows what a buffalo and lion means (even though she may not call it by those terms):
Man according to the definition of the writers where the term comes from, is a BEING that is the image and likeness of nature
not the rapist and murderer and thief of nature
so not all are ONE.............
much of what we think of as mankind is still in the stage of a virus, parasite who lives off nature but gives little back...........
so how would we give back to nature?
the first thing that comes to mind is "STOP TAKING MORE THAN YOU NEED FROM HER":
the second thing would be, if you know you are ONE WITH NATURE and that everyone else is part of nature even if they are still a parasite, is that YOU consider everything that is ONE WITH YOU
if you can ignore 2/3 of nature because you don't agree with the beliefs it holds, then you are giving the ONE thing lip service
like most lips, they take in to feed and give out to destroy
only the heart that understands 'knowledge' (HOW NATURE WORKS) can speak from its abundance to bring LIFE to the WHOLE
if you are not helping the whole that you so much believe in
you are hurting it..........the law of entropy hence nature is either in a state of anabolism......metabolism or catabolism............making things new, maintaining them.......or breaking them down to remake them......again
MAN is the state of nature that will be in equalibrium with nature, meaning nature will be giving and receiving equally through MAN
or according to those who experienced nature deep within and defined the language to express NATURE, thats what MAN is and will be
Why do YOU think "God" had anything to do with it...?
Do you actually believe the tales of Genesis...
-- Are meant to be taken Literally...?
And, If You DO...
Why on Earth Would YOU Believe...
-- Such Sheer and Utter Nonsense...?
Non-Believer here. I don't believe it happened 'tall.
If it did happen - to me, it seems pretty petty but then again... If it did happen as explained - well, obviously it was Good because God would be the Guy that determines what is Good and Evil. I mean, you're not seriously going to argue with God are you? The last guy that did that got cast out of Heaven, was turned Red and given Horns and some Cloven Feet. Can you imagine trying to fit Cloven Feet into Cowboy Boots?
RE:If being perfect like God means that we must have the knowledge of good and evil, then Adam and Eve had to eat of the tree of knowledge ----
Adam and Eve were perfect and sinless before they ate of the fruit. It is because of their disobedience that they became imperfect. The text stating that they have become like us refers to the ability they have taken upon themselves to decide for themselves what is right and wrong instead of subjecting themselves to God's decrees.
Since mankind was not created with the ability to decide for themselves what is right and wrong they also became sinners because to "sin" in Bible terminology means to miss the mark, in this case, missing the mark of obedience to God.
People today of course have many different opinions about this, but according to the Bible having a perfect moral sense means accepting God's standards instead of chosing our own.
(Romans 10:3) . . ., because of not knowing the righteousness of God but seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. . .
Although the Bible does say that we are of divine nature or Gods (Psalm 82:6) 6 I myself have said, you are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.
(John 10:34) . . .Jesus answered them: Is it not written in your Law, I said: YOU are gods?
Nonetheless nowhere are we encouraged to strive to be God's but rather to reflect his quality, thus the reference that we are made in his "image". Image being a reflection of the original.
Even Jesus did not presume to take Gods place. (Philippians 2:6) . . .although he was existing in Gods form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. . .
"if perfect, God would not have to command them to do or not do anything. Right?"
Not necessarily GIA, of course that depends on the definition that a person attaches to perfection.
This scenario might explain what I mean:
A person buy a crystal vase that by all appearance is a perfect vase. After purchase the buyer drops the vase and it breaks. Does this mean the vase was faulty? No, because the perfection applied to different characteristic of it, maybe its shape, purity of glass etc. Only if an object that is supposed to endure harsh shock can be said to be flawed if it breaks after a fall.
There is no basis to expect A&E to have had abilities that are not explicitly stated that they would have.
For instance the fact that they weren't as strong as some animals or able to fly like birds does not mean they were imperfect.
This applies also expectation that A&E should not have been capable of disobedience.
If they would have been created as robots without the ability for rebellion then and only then could it be rightly said that they were not perfect if they disobeyed, this however is not the case.
God expected them -and us- to be faithful and obedient, making those qualities hardwired in humans and impossible to deviate from, would in effect make those qualities meaningless.
Since God has the ability to exercise his free will, "made in God's image" means that humans would have that ability as well.