God: 'don't eat from the tree'

> God: 'don't eat from the tree'
> Adam and Eve: 'Okay'
> Adam and Eve proceed to eat from the tree

Why were they so stupid? Is there any genuinely good explanation/justification for their actions?

God's a spook, apples are tasty.

snek tricked 'em

They could not possibly understand prescriptions before they had understanding of morality.

The in-text explanation is that they were tempted by the serpent and promised god-like wisdom if they ate from it, and their pride got the better of them.

A more metaphorical interpretation of the story would use the fruit of the tree as an allegory of prideful rebellion against God's law.

So pride and greed pretty much either way.

They didn't know God from Evil mane. How would they even know they're not supposed to eat them?

*Good from Evil
Not quite mane. 10 times that depth tbhfam.

It's a weak plot device to get a conflict started and actually make story interesting...only nothing but dribble came from it. Boring fucking dribble.

The first story in the bible follows a simple bamboozling.

Is the rest of the Bible this poorly written?

The snake is inside of every human - it's called temptation and it is a glimpse of power you can gain with knowledge. They were not stupid, they were just too weak in their curiosity and too strong in their will to power. Why? Cause knowledge is the sweetest fruit of labor. And you wanna taste that fruit. We all want to taste that fruit. But the real dilemma is - how do you use your knowledge? do you used it for good or for bad? do you used it at all? do you not want it anymore? would you rather have stayed in the blissful ignorance?

You know it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil not the tree of knowledge, right?

all knowledge stems from a basic understanding of what's right (good) and what's wrong (evil)

>Not quite mane. 10 times that depth tbhfam.
yeah some retarded nigger is gonna write us a 250 character twitter post in niggerspeak about how he's smarter than you
fucking kill yourself you prideful faggot

actually, it's the three of knowledge of all things, good and evil

then why aren't we omniscient?

cool claim, care to support it?

We are, because we have word. That's why man is the master of all things, he who names.

Ok I might be convinced. You're saying it's used as a merism.

can satan just take the form of god instead of snake and tell them he changed his mind? I mean I guess the snake plan worked anyways so who cares but that plan seems unbeatable.

Because Eve was a stupid cunt

sneaky

>can satan just take the form of god
wait... what if that was what he was doing all throughout the bible?

aren't there people who believe the god of the old testament is an impostor or the demiurge?

Is there any proof he can look like anything besides a fallen Angel or a serpent?

the Bible clearly refers to Satan as "The Serpent".

Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

what if all teh bible and stuff is true except god does it as a prank and sends all the believers to hell

>God: "You can eat everything here and nothing will ever hurt you but don't eat from that tree for reasons I will not explain"
>A&E: "uh, sure, I guess"
>Serpent "Eve that tree won't actually hurt you, it tastes good like everything else and it doesn't make any sense God would put something bad here
>Eve: "Oh hey that makes perfect sense. I should tell Adam about these dank apples that totally don't hurt you"
>Adam: "Hey these apples are pretty good and nothing bad happened, wonder why God told us not to eat these. Oh, we should probably put some pants on"
>God "REEEEEE FUCKING NORMIES GET OUT OF MY GARDEN I DON'T CARE THE APPLES DON'T HURT YOU I'M GOING TO HURT YOU NOW AND THAT INCLUDES YOU SERPENT"
>Serpet: "fug XDDDD"

TL;DR God's an autist

Friendly reminder that the Revelations you and I have read is a Europeanized, butchered revision of Hebrew mythology from an age after the initial Hebrew mythology fell out of cultural standing.

In other words we don't get half the shit being talked about and neither did the people who wrote it. Ultimately the Revelation comes as close to being mythologically valid as John Gardner's Grendel.

Sure is Reddit in here.

the bad thing that happened is that they saw death. they were not immortal anymore, unlike animals who are because of their lack of awareness of death. and the presence of death in the garden of bliss is not possible

God needed them to eat the apple such that all of humanity could come into existence, and get this little project rolling. Therefore he designed them in such a way that when he sent his right hand in to tempt them, they'd do exactly what he wanted them to.

This is an absurdly dumb post.

>old testament
>eating the fruit of knowledge and gaining free will cursed humanity forever
>new testament
>Jesus loves sinners who repent more than those who don't sin at all

What did God mean by this?

30 posts and no answer about how Eve was first to come up with idea of eating forbidden fruit, and how it means that women are inferior, and men are cucks. I am honestly suprised at you Veeky Forums in this snowy, thursday night

>God isn't omniscient
>God didn't know that in designing humans in that fashion they would necessarily eat the fruit under those conditions

>b-b-but God planned people to fail so that he could judge their character!
>that totally doesn't make God a manipulative asshole or anything though

Because it was a false god aka "demiurge"; and the snake who urged Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge was an angel trying to wake up humanity to that fact.

It's the same reason your girlfriend fucked your best friend.

i dont get it is this legit theory, or are you joking?

>God judges people
>Everyone doesn't go to heaven

that's some petty revisionism, God states that eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge makes them flawed as it gives them knowledge which only God should possess, and he adds pain, sorrow, starvation and eventual Death to the list of their punishments himself.

it boils down to a point about the Abrahamic God that modern translators often ignore or revise; the element of supremacy over humans that must be strictly maintained, even down to the inability of humans to speak God's name (hence the tetragrammaton).
Abraham's God is an asshole who plays favorites and often changes his mind, a trait shared with many early deities in various cultures, but the Hebrew culture itself never advanced to a point of humanism in which this trait of God could be reflected on, probably due to the extreme trials faced by the Israelites themselves. So when a decidedly more advanced and humanitarian people revitalized the faith they revised these elements.

>New Testament says everyone's gonna go to heaven anyways after God's Army storms the gates of Hell
>eternal torment is just a prank bro

Not them but it sounds like something from Blavatsky like Isis Unveiled (not that Isis), or The Secret Doctrine. Or just Foucault's Pendulum.

There's an excuse for Eve, but not for Adam.

Adam witnessed God create thing while Eve didn't. Eve only believed in God's power by word of mouth, not experience.

It's called Gnosticism.

It's standard gnostic cosmology. The material world (i.e. the body) is a prison for the soul ruled by the demiurge. That's why the material world, and life is so imperfect and full of suffering.

has no one here read paradise lost?

Because Adam and Eve were stupid, or rather they interpret actions directly. God telling them not to eat from the tree is the equivalent of God telling them not to eat from the tree while he was looking. They've fundamentally understood that they'll be chastised, but only while he was there.

>Eternal torment was an idea introduced in the Bible, and not a heresy introduced into canon by the Catholic Church at a later date

>paintings of the garden show the serpent as a snake with no legs
>serpent had legs until god punished him for tempting adam and eve

non-canon

>>God isn't omniscient
Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, "Where art thou?"

If God is omniscient why didn't he know where Adam was? Checkmate, demiurge worshippers.

>God didn't know where Adam was
>God wasn't intentionally asking this to elicit an emotional response from Adam

kek

i know this word: "gnosticism", i was asking about that
>and the snake who urged Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge was an angel trying to wake up humanity to that fact.
who wrote that?

>Implying God didn't personally torment those he perceived as having slighted him or even at random (see: Job)
>implying Sheol doesn't exist

So he was being manipulative?

>She'ol in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which all the dead go, both the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from the Hebrew God.[1]

Hmm...

>God wasn't taking actions that will maximize utility in the long run

Nice

>God is a utilitarian
Huh, now all the morally reprehensible aspects of God make sense.

Actually its just the world tree and nidhoggr

So, if they didn't have knowledge of good and evil, how did they know it was evil to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

I think it was in the Nag Hammadi library or Pistis Sophia. They both are codices that pre-date the birth Jesus or come from around that time period.

Eve's fault. That's why women suffer painful child births.

actually that's because of the location of the pelvic bone required for standing upright

>implying God didn't invent the pelvic bone

>demiurge
fuck that guy

It's a parable you dumb shit. Man is doomed to folly, prepare for consequences.

Old Testament: God kills innocent children because of their birthplace (Egypt). Presented as a good.

New Testament: Herod kills innocent children because of their birthplace (Bethlehem). Presented as bad.

/thread

God is a massive jerk throughout the whole Old Testament
He pulls a "it's just a prank bro!" on Abraham and his goddamn son

This thread reminded me of something I was thinking about Christianity recently.

>supernatural events in the Old Testament are symbolic and teach a lesson, they are not meant to be taken literally
>supernatural events in the New Testament are literal, and if you don't believe them you're a heretic

Any apologists care to explain this?

>the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an apple

Easily. You said it yourself.

OT is sacred revelation and understood as symbolic.

NT is tainted with politics and "right understanding."

read paradise lost

as if OP had the patience or intelligence for this

Are you Jewish?

No. I am a bad Catholic / Gnostic heretic.

OT is tribal knowledge, and understood as such. NT was used as a political tool in the early centuries AD. The consequences of the Catholic Church claiming orthodoxy was everyone else in the local Joe-Bob cult became heretics. This is basic stuff come on now.

Edgy boi

>The consequences of the Catholic Church claiming orthodoxy was everyone else in the local Joe-Bob cult became heretics. This is basic stuff come on now.
Yeah, my rational mind tells me this but I'm having a hard time shaking the spooks I got from being raised Catholic.

Have you not reached enlightenment? Have you not read the Greeks!?

Blasphemy! Heresy!

Pretty sure it's as simple as the fact that the average human barely has the mental strength or intellect to keep themselves breathing.

Most authors are fairly privileged or at least didn't grow up around common-folk, so they go almost their entire lives not having to interact with what could be considered the average human.
If I told any random lowbrow that resides in the town I grew up in that eating a light bulb would give them godlike knowledge, they would almost certainly do it.

I read Homer, Plato, Pre-socratics, and some Epictetus. I still don't know everything.

Just remember what Catholic means: "universal." This is humans claiming ownership of a truth. ie, only one correct way to understand the biblical narrative. They went so far as to ban certain books and call them heretical, then in the centuries that followed they persecuted anyone who didn't toe the party line. Fuck the Holy See. Fuck them right in their corrupt asshole.

If you really did read Plato, you should know that you know nothing.

B-but they're guided by the Holy Spirit so they can't be wrong!

it was written by Jews so yes

The holy spirit is literally a spirit of enlightenment. It [metaphorically] impregnated Mary and created an avatar of goodwill. Her son went on to teach the greatest, most practical philosophy we've ever known. Unlike the postmoderns or other post-Renaissance memesters, Christ's teaching made a practical purpose for desire and the selfish urge. It sublimated animal instict for a cultural revolution of extreme tolerance. Motherfucker was a hundred Gandhis. And what did the human species do with this philosophy? Monetized it, perverted it, and made "proper belief" into a cause for war. Fuck fuck fuck this species I hate you all.

>And what did the human species do with this philosophy? Monetized it, perverted it, and made "proper belief" into a cause for war. Fuck fuck fuck this species I hate you all.
Mote, beam, etc.

Although I'll admit murdering people for having a different opinion is a pretty fucking significant mote.

>the bible clearly refers to...

no the translation of revelations you are quoting refers to satan as an ancient serpent. genesis never claims the serpent to be anything other than a crafty animal.

>argument that morality stems solely from christianity
Christianity owes its continued existence to the death throes of the Roman Empire and would have died to history as had many other would-be messiahs were it not for extremely beneficial timing.
Meanwhile the vast majority of its tenets were not only well within the practice of normal society at the time, but were also independently concluded with and without "divine enlightenment" all around the world.

Joshua son of Joseph was a historically significant rabbi of the Jewish faith whose validity was skyrocketed thanks to lucky timing. From a philosophical and historical standpoint, the prophet Muhammad was arguably more influential on the course of history through his own actions.

>blah blah blah
I never said Christianity had exclusive claim on moral teaching, you fucking faggot.

enlightenedbymyintelligence.png

I don't consider myself enlightened, or necessarily intelligent. My opinion of the average person is just very low

>i've never read a book but I watch youtube videos

>Joshua son of Joseph was a historically significant rabbi of the Jewish faith whose validity was skyrocketed thanks to lucky timing.
Not only that, but the fact that he was killed, and died as a martyr. Imagine what the world would be like if Pilate killed Barrabas instead. You can't.

First off my point is that your statement of "everyone is a drooling retard EXCEPT ME" is ridiculous. Second off intelligence is relative so if you think the average person is so dumb, then yes, you do think of yourself as highly intelligent

this is a good nurture determinist's explanation

if you're not "necessarily intelligent" then are you average?

>samefag does a double take

I can't really see how you perceived that I think I'm the only intelligent person there is or something. Obviously there are billions of people more intelligent than me

across the entire human race, I'm probably average. On the island I grew up on, probably above average.
If I had the money to live somewhere where I was by comparison an idiot, I would.

...