Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Someone expained this to me the other day and it does make sense...
The bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple , it says they tasted fruit from the tree of knowledge-good and evil. God has used the word "trees" symbolically in the scriptures before to mean people both good and bad. It was not an evil apple that caused sin on mankind for generations. Perhaps the fruit that Eve tasted, was Satan tempting Eve with sexual sin, meaning she had sex with the serpent (Satan) in the garden, and then went and had sex with Adam to show him what she had discovered. When Jesus approached them afterwards, they hid from him because they were naked. It makes sense that they were now aware of their nakedness after engaging in sexual relations. Eve then had two sons, one was Cain (who was evil) and the other was Abel (who was good). Was Cain, then, of Satan's seed and Abel was of Adam's seed?
Cain is never listed in Adam's geneology, but is described as "of the evil one".
...It seems like the apple story is a better way to explain sin to children, instead of saying: Eve had sex with Satan and then went and had sex with Adam and that's why you are a sinner today.
Someone expained this to me the other day and it does make sense...
The bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple , it says they tasted fruit from the tree of knowledge-good and evil. God has used the word "trees" symbolically in the scriptures before to mean people both good and bad. It was not an evil apple that caused sin on mankind for generations. Perhaps the fruit that Eve tasted, was Satan tempting Eve with sexual sin, meaning she had sex with the serpent (Satan) in the garden, and then went and had sex with Adam to show him what she had discovered. When Jesus approached them afterwards, they hid from him because they were naked. It makes sense that they were now aware of their nakedness after engaging in sexual relations. Eve then had two sons, one was Cain (who was evil) and the other was Abel (who was good). Was Cain, then, of Satan's seed and Abel was of Adam's seed?
Cain is never listed in Adam's geneology, but is described as "of the evil one".
...It seems like the apple story is a better way to explain sin to children, instead of saying: Eve had sex with Satan and then went and had sex with Adam and that's why you are a sinner today.
Wow! The things we don't learn here on City-Data! (And people think my beliefs are out there. ) The Bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple. True. The Bible says that Eve had sex with Satan. False. Interesting perspective, though.
Actually, though, since we're talking symbolism, let me throw out another thought. The tree God told Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit from was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. I believe that's what it was, but that "good and evil" actually represented opposites in general. Without being exposed to both good and evil, Adam and Eve would not be able to distinguish between them. I doubt very much that they really appreciated how wonderful their garden paradise was, having never known anything with which to compare it. Once they were cast out of the Garden, they came to know all kinds of opposites: health and sickness, happiness and sorrow, success and failure, etc. It wasn't just "good and evil," in very general terms, but everything we judge as being good or evil, right or wrong. They came to have knowledge of everything that their limited understanding in Eden restricted them from being able to comprehend. And this knowledge was actually critical to their ultimate progression on the path that would take them back to God.
You mentioned that prior to their having "sinned" (in whatever way they may have sinned), they were unaware of their nakedness, in other words, that they were sexually naive. I would agree with you there. The Bible makes no mention of their having sexual relations until after they ate the forbidden fruit and specifically points out that they were unaware of their nakedness until that time. There does seem to be a correlation between their eating the fruit and coming to an understanding of their sexuality. I'm not sure whether you're suggesting that sexual intimacy between them was wrong (i.e. evil), but I don't think it was. I just think that a "coming of age" sexually appears to have been one of the things that eating the forbidden fruit brought about. Again, though, I see all of this as being part of God's plan. If they had never realized that they were naked (i.e. has remained ignorant of the sexuality), they would never have been able to fulfill the first commandment they were given, to multiply and replenish the Earth.
Wow! The things we don't learn here on City-Data! (And people think my beliefs are out there. ) The Bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple. True. The Bible says that Eve had sex with Satan. False. Interesting perspective, though.
Actually, though, since we're talking symbolism, let me throw out another thought. The tree God told Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit from was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. I believe that's what it was, but that "good and evil" actually represented opposites in general. Without being exposed to both good and evil, Adam and Eve would not be able to distinguish between them. I doubt very much that they really appreciated how wonderful their garden paradise was, having never known anything with which to compare it. Once they were cast out of the Garden, they came to know all kinds of opposites: health and sickness, happiness and sorrow, success and failure, etc. It wasn't just "good and evil," in very general terms, but everything we judge as being good or evil, right or wrong. They came to have knowledge of everything that their limited understanding in Eden restricted them from being able to comprehend. And this knowledge was actually critical to their ultimate progression on the path that would take them back to God.
You mentioned that prior to their having "sinned" (in whatever way they may have sinned), they were unaware of their nakedness, in other words, that they were sexually naive. I would agree with you there. The Bible makes no mention of their having sexual relations until after they ate the forbidden fruit and specifically points out that they were unaware of their nakedness until that time. There does seem to be a correlation between their eating the fruit and coming to an understanding of their sexuality. I'm not sure whether you're suggesting that sexual intimacy between them was wrong (i.e. evil), but I don't think it was. I just think that a "coming of age" sexually appears to have been one of the things that eating the forbidden fruit brought about. Again, though, I see all of this as being part of God's plan. If they had never realized that they were naked (i.e. has remained ignorant of the sexuality), they would never have been able to fulfill the first commandment they were given, to multiply and replenish the Earth.
If this is the first commandment wouldn't/shouldn't they have 'known each other' before consuming the fruit? Did they have to eat the fruit to realise/comprehend the first commandment?
[/b]If this is the first commandment wouldn't/shouldn't they have 'known each other' before consuming the fruit? Did they have to eat the fruit to realise/comprehend the first commandment?
Well, the Bible doesn't specifically say one way or the other. It does say, though, that they didn't know they were naked, which would be an odd thing to point out unless it was significant in some way. It always does say that they "knew each other," but it doesn't mention this until after they ate the fruit. Granted, my perspective is not spelled out, but neither is any other. My personal belief is that eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was a necessary first step in bringing about God's Plan of Salvation. We have to be exposed to both good and evil in order to make a choice between them. I also don't believe that God would have allowed Lucifer to tempt them (and He certainly could have prevented him from doing so) if it was not part of His plan that they learn for themselves what the consequences of disobedience were and learned to trust Him (i.e. God) in the future.
Wow! The things we don't learn here on City-Data! (And people think my beliefs are out there. ) The Bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple. True. The Bible says that Eve had sex with Satan. False. Interesting perspective, though.
Actually, though, since we're talking symbolism, let me throw out another thought. The tree God told Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit from was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. I believe that's what it was, but that "good and evil" actually represented opposites in general. Without being exposed to both good and evil, Adam and Eve would not be able to distinguish between them. I doubt very much that they really appreciated how wonderful their garden paradise was, having never known anything with which to compare it. Once they were cast out of the Garden, they came to know all kinds of opposites: health and sickness, happiness and sorrow, success and failure, etc. It wasn't just "good and evil," in very general terms, but everything we judge as being good or evil, right or wrong. They came to have knowledge of everything that their limited understanding in Eden restricted them from being able to comprehend. And this knowledge was actually critical to their ultimate progression on the path that would take them back to God.
You mentioned that prior to their having "sinned" (in whatever way they may have sinned), they were unaware of their nakedness, in other words, that they were sexually naive. I would agree with you there. The Bible makes no mention of their having sexual relations until after they ate the forbidden fruit and specifically points out that they were unaware of their nakedness until that time. There does seem to be a correlation between their eating the fruit and coming to an understanding of their sexuality. I'm not sure whether you're suggesting that sexual intimacy between them was wrong (i.e. evil), but I don't think it was. I just think that a "coming of age" sexually appears to have been one of the things that eating the forbidden fruit brought about. Again, though, I see all of this as being part of God's plan. If they had never realized that they were naked (i.e. has remained ignorant of the sexuality), they would never have been able to fulfill the first commandment they were given, to multiply and replenish the Earth.
Islam does not say much about Adam and Eve is only referred to as Adam's spouse. the Arabic version of the name Eve is Haawa. But the Qur'an tells us we should follow the truth of the scriptures that came before. While we do believe the original scriptures no longer exist in their original form and because of errors in interpretation, translation and even possible fraud, they may contain error, but we do believe some truth still remains. therefore we do treat the scriptures of other people with respect. While the Book of Genesis does not seem to contradict the Qur'an, on a personal basis I see more as a metaphor than factual description. I find the concept of sex with Iblis (Satan) to be absurd.
I think we can be certain that at least in a metaphorical sense they ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge. No specific fruit is mentioned. We can not be certain if Adam and Eve actually disobeyed or came to the realization of having free will. In my understanding (astagfirullah) of Islamic belief, it always was intended that Adam and Eve would live on earth and earth was prepared for them We do not see there coming to earth as a punishment, but rather as coming to where they can use their free will. Free will can not exist in a place free from sin. It was necessary for them to come to earth so that mankind would have true free will.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 08-07-2011 at 07:32 PM..
These disputes and attempts to literalize, symbolize or actualize the morality stories in Genesis are futile. They are teachings describing our "educational" experiences toward spiritual development . . . not worldly events. The episodes in Genesis describe our basic experiences. Teaching at the very basic level requires experiencing more than explanation. Words have no meaning without some base to relate them to. If you sit down and discuss all the ramifications of touching fire with your toddler . . . you are wasting your time. An intellect without experience cannot be taught by talking. There are certain basics in life that must be experienced.
It is common knowledge that each and every human being must experience and repeat the entire pattern of human development. Each individual must learn everything for himself with the aid of his parents or society. Thus, the womb existence is a repetition of the evolution into a human being, and the various stages of fetal development mirror that evolution. (The fetus even "appears" (not really) to have gills like a fish at one stage.) The actual birth represents the seeding of our soul . . . the breathing into man's nostrils of the breath of life (Atman, Adamah). Infancy represents Eden, with parents as the all-providing God, and so on through maturity. "As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be."
The experience with the "tree of knowledge of Good and Evil" was to teach us that we must distinguish between our desires. Without external teaching we would simply respond to everything our animal nature desires making us a truly superior animal . . . not human. We have many of those among us even today.
These disputes and attempts to literalize, symbolize or actualize the morality stories in Genesis are futile. They are teachings describing our "educational" experiences toward spiritual development . . . not worldly events. The episodes in Genesis describe our basic experiences. Teaching at the very basic level requires experiencing more than explanation. Words have no meaning without some base to relate them to. If you sit down and discuss all the ramifications of touching fire with your toddler . . . you are wasting your time. An intellect without experience cannot be taught by talking. There are certain basics in life that must be experienced.
It is common knowledge that each and every human being must experience and repeat the entire pattern of human development. Each individual must learn everything for himself with the aid of his parents or society. Thus, the womb existence is a repetition of the evolution into a human being, and the various stages of fetal development mirror that evolution. (The fetus even "appears" (not really) to have gills like a fish at one stage.) The actual birth represents the seeding of our soul . . . the breathing into man's nostrils of the breath of life (Atman, Adamah). Infancy represents Eden, with parents as the all-providing God, and so on through maturity. "As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be."
The experience with the "tree of knowledge of Good and Evil" was to teach us that we must distinguish between our desires. Without external teaching we would simply respond to everything our animal nature desires making us a truly superior animal . . . not human. We have many of those among us even today.
This is one of the better Genesis 1 analyses I've ever come across! And very similar to my thinking.
The Adam and Eve story not only doesn't mention an apple, it doesn't mention Satan, either. Just "the serpent". Identifying the serpent afterward as Satan was a Christian addition. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that in Judaism the serpent/snake is not Satan.
Doesn't matter--I'm with Mystic--this is not a literal story, but possibly one full of metaphor.
The Adam and Eve story not only doesn't mention an apple, it doesn't mention Satan, either. Just "the serpent". Identifying the serpent afterward as Satan was a Christian addition. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that in Judaism the serpent/snake is not Satan.
Doesn't matter--I'm with Mystic--this is not a literal story, but possibly one full of metaphor.
But if the story is full of metaphor (which, I agree that it is), the serpent is almost certainly metaphorical. The question is, who or what does it represent?
The Adam and Eve story not only doesn't mention an apple, it doesn't mention Satan, either. Just "the serpent". Identifying the serpent afterward as Satan was a Christian addition. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that in Judaism the serpent/snake is not Satan.
Doesn't matter--I'm with Mystic--this is not a literal story, but possibly one full of metaphor.
Correct, not only is the serpent not Satan in Judaism, Satan is not an evil being bent on destroying humanity in Judaism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) The Bible never says that Adam and Eve ate an apple. True. The Bible says that Eve had sex with Satan. False. Interesting perspective, though.
If this is the first commandment wouldn't/shouldn't they have 'known each other' before consuming the fruit? Did they have to eat the fruit to realise/comprehend the first commandment?
