Adam and Eve get the Boot

The believers according to their faith, the unbelievers according to their works.

 

Part of the problem is that you are making your counters based on others' claim on what God can and cannot do, will and won't do, and so on. And when you look at a overall religion that can't even agree on trinity or not trinity, making counter claims only counter what others' claim, not what is. Despite claims, all knowing might just well mean knows everything up to the current moment, and not necessarily what happens in the future. On the other side of the coin, as parents, we constantly tell our children to not do this or that, knowing perfectly well that if we leave them to be, they will likely do what we told them not to do. And then we turn around, knowing full what who did what, asking who did this thing, or did you do this? So why would God necessarily be any different? There is every reason to believe that God had the trees there for purposes of His own, just as we have things around our house that are for us as adults, but we tell the children not to touch for one reason or the other. As the "parent" God didn't own A&E any explanation as to why they were there and why they should not touch them.

 

I can, a least in the manner that you seem to be presenting it. Or we could go the other way and point out that pretty much all teaching of children for things not objective, is indoctrination. This could be politics, manners, religion, ethics, and the list goes on. That is not to say that religion cannot be passed on as indoctrination. But a parent merely passing no their beliefs to the child is not automatically so.

 

I'm not so sure abut that, unless you want to go the True Scotsman fallacy is claiming that those who do are not real Christians. I've met plenty who hold that belief. I personally don't, but I take that from the evidence of there being a Tree of Life as well as a Tree of Knowledge.

There is also enough break and gap that we could easily say that He go the evolutionary process into place, and then created A&E with bodies that would continue to use that process to evolve further.

 

Means nothing. There are no actual records of dates of those events, only sequence. So we don't know how old Cain and Able were when the first murder happened, nor how long it was between that and Cain reaching Nod and settling down. Given that they recorded the ages in the hundred's of years, Cain could have been over 300 when we killed Able, and 500 before he got married. Somehow I doubt that Cain, Able and Seth were the only children A&E had, and incest was, at least under a created pair context, the most likely. I once ran the numbers, and with a couple of assumptions and only counting out to Eve's grandchildren, got to well over 16,000 people by the end of the first century of procreation. And by then you are actually 7 or 8 generations available. So it's not a stretch to assume population by incest. And incest wasn't made forbidden until after Moses's time.

 

What states that they were created immortal? Note that I am not stating anything about created or in God's image. In His image does not automatically mean immortal.

 

Yes, there is a tree of life. But the two trees have major distinctions in what they mean.

In this discussion I think the point is what did god mean concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

I'd suggest reading prominent Christian scholars on this division.

Your second paragraph hits me as a contrivance, as it shows no reason for evolution being insufficient. And, I don't believe that evolution is a strike at God, as it would surely be more difficult to set up conditions for the various life forms to come into existence through evolution than it would be to manufacture one life form.

Regardless, it seems that the early chapters of Genesis have greater richness when seen as allegory. Being tempted to ignore god's proscription is so prosaic when ignoring the full meaning of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 

I didn't say it was insufficient. It could be as simple as, "let's start this lifeform from this advanced point and see where it goes"

Nor do I. I often point out that the use of evolution is still valid within the wording of Genesis. There is nothing that says that God didn't create evolution as a tool and use that tool to either create species or to set things in motion and to see what came out. And that later could well be why He created A&E (on the premise of them being created) instead of letting humans just maybe randomly appear.

 

Because what they ate caused them to die. Hence initially immortal. So they did not evolve to that point as immortal is changeless. And procreation is to spite death as well as the means to bring the remainder of Gods spiritual children to life. So our first Parents disobedience according to the adversaries attempt to thwart God and destroy his creation, worked to fill the earth with mankind by the wisdom and power of God.

 

I am not countering other's claims. I am pointing out illogic in the story. God is telling two people not to do something when they have no knowledge of right or wrong and then blaming them, who were in fact innocent before biting the apple.

The religious can probably assign this to the legacy of Adam and Eve, but humans are born with a moral sense. Studies have shown infants know when they have been wronged. It is fine tuned through culturalization and brain development.

The definition of indoctrination as passing down information is nearly meaningless. I would say indoctrination is the teaching of an ethical philosophy as the only one true and not debatable. Teaching a set of beliefs in an uncritical manner.

 

That is biblical teaching. Many block it out. Many all of the time, some most of the time, and some part of the time. That is why humans experience shame and it is all on them.

 

The Bible doesnt make much sense when you take it literally. Very few Christians value strict Bible literalism. Most often Bible literalism is used by non-Christians to poke fun at Christianity and The Bible. Though its worth mentioning its usually because they've encountered one of the rare Bible literalist believers ...they are out there, and they can be a bit ...extra.

Seems to me the Adam and Eve story is one of independence. They had the choice to remain ignorant, sheltered, utterly careless and cared for, for all eternity. Instead they chose the hard road, the one of knowledge and of the toil that comes along with it. The 'original sin' I don't think was so much of a sin as it was the choosing of suffering. Bliss is being God's beloved, stupid pet in Eden forever. Adam and Eve chose not bliss. I believe this is when Humans stopped being God's pets and became His children. What parent isn't happy to see their children strike it out on their own instead of couch-potatoing their life away? Of course this is never accomplished without hardship and risk.

 

It is a depiction of when man became human.
It is much prettier than:
At some point the early hominids realized they were not like the other animals. They were special. The could do things they could not, in addition to the regular animal things. They began to learn to think outside of themselves beyond food, sex, predators, and survival. They realized someone did that and that person should be revered.

 

You are when you are assuming their basis for what God has supposedly done. The actions are only illogical based on your perceptions of them. We tell children, who have no knowledge of right or wrong, not to do something and then punish them when they do, when they were in fact, at least according to your logic, innocent before engaging in the action. Remember that at that point, A&E were effectively toddlers at best in knowledge or right and wrong.

Whether something is indoctrination or not usually ends up being a subjective matter. Look at how many would claim that the teaching of the opposite political philosophy is to be considered indoctrination. Basically, one man's indoctrination is another man's education.

 

Hate to bust your bubble, but they had no concept of good or evil and the only world they knew was Eden. So they had no idea they were choosing the "hard road" until after the bite, if given the actual options of making that choice, they could be still chilling in Eden.

You can rationalize all you want, but God creates two people without knowledge of good or evil and then gives them a moral choice. He then holds them accountable. They are not like toddlers who know they are disobeying.

Indoctrination is indeed subjective and it is a education subcategory. One used in negative ways.

 

Well sure, if you're dead set on a literal interpretation. I look it at the Creation story and Adam and Eve (and most of The Bible) as more of an allegory.

Are you a Bible literalist? Like, do you believe The Bible and all the stories within literally happened 100% as it says they did? For example, where it says during Jesus' 3 days between His Crucifixion and His Resurrection, he spent 3 days 'preaching to the imprisoned.' So was that just literally in a jail cell somewhere nearby?

 

Yeah, everyone has their own spin on the Bible, but I criticized yours because it didn't make sense.

 

You didn't answer the question tho. Do believe the Bible is all literal or can it be allegorical?

 

and if God can ask a father to murder his Son to prove his loyalty, the Bible even if truly a God's word, could just be a test, maybe he is looking for people dumb enough to blindly believe it, the question is, is doing so passing or failing...

 

As are our children when they first start growing up an exploring the world.

If you count obeying the rules of the parent as a moral choice, then so be it. But it is still the same choice we give our own children.

Are you trying to tell me that you do not hold your own children accountable when they disobey you, even if they do not understand the why of your rule?

A&E knew they were disobeying as well.

Negative itself is a subjective value and it can be argued whether the use of indoctrination is positive or negative, the same as it can be argued whether or not something it indoctrination.

 

The story of Adam and Eve is made up of parts of earlier Mesopotamian myths. Molded by early story tellers to what we have now. The standard spin is disobey God and pay the price. I had a problem with that, what I saw was was a god that was either mean or not all knowing. And skepticism of authoritarian opinion continued.

You still don't get it. Children know right from wrong, unless they are born a psychopath. To obey because you are told to, is right, to ignore it, is wrong. A child knows that. Adam and Eve did not know that. The reasoning behind the rule does not matter. It may be too complex for the child to understand.
An argument can be made that everything not objective is subjective. Indoctrination, as I said, is teaching beliefs in an uncritical manner. That is a negative because certain information is purposely being left out, which is distorting the student's judgement.

 

If you think about "God" as the Being of Light of near death experience fame......

who regards each and every human life as being off the scale valuable......

so valuable that each human has a "Life Review" that has been recorded by technology far, far, far, far, beyond anything that we humans have came up with so far........

.....
and our great, great, great grandparents..... in a sense fell upwards.......

in that they set the stage for Messiah Yeshua - Jesus to play out the role of Messiah the Passover Lamb......

so that we could grasp the offering that was being made on our behalf........
.....
.....

The Ancient Jewish Book of Adam and Eve adds interesting details about the conflict between Adam and Eve and Satan......

and the name "Azazel" in the original Hebrew of Leviticus chapter sixteen.....
....
indicates that Adam and Eve and their children... especially Messiah Yeshua - Jesus.... are setting up a reality film series that leads to people being able to

understand why they end up in paradise or heaven......
....
Near death experiencer Kevin Zadai was shown Jesus going to hell until the moment of his Resurrection.......
that is so that He could raise up anybody out of the lowest levels of hell itself...... hell = sheol or hades... the grave.....
....

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YoOgXsjSwOo?app=desktop