The tree of knowledge and misunderstanding of evil among Catholic!

[fhansen]

So why we were not created in the state of united with the God in the first place?.

See below

In fact my claim is true based on facts. Adam and Eve fell, Angels fell…

Yes? And Adam, Eve, and all humanity can rise again, to even greater heights! Their fall can be the beginning step in their rising to perfection.

Why create a failure then? We will constantly in the position to fall because of greed and sense of neutrality toward what we have…

What’s superior, a being that is made perfect, forced to be perfect, or one who chooses perfection, after seeing and experiencing the other, imperfect side? Which is “more perfect”? God knows goodness and perfection by nature-because He is goodness and perfection. We experience it in a relative sense: the nearer we are to it, to Him, the more we experience it. We’re free to draw near, or to turn away. All creation is necessarily less perfect than its Creator. This in no way means that it wasn’t worthwhile to create. God, in His goodness, can provide all sufficient goodness-and beyond- to those who love Him.

What we need is what God knows otherwise we will be unsatisfied. But that means to be God…

Oh. Why? Did you just make that up? Is a child less satisfied than an adult for not knowing what an adult knows?

It is not. We have two state of being: 1) state of full awareness, 2) state of ignorance. The first one belongs to God and the second apply to us. Do you like to be ignorant for ever?.

I’m satisfied with what He gives; He will deprive us of nothing we need in order to be boundlessly happy. Jealousy of Him will get us nowhere, but into chaos and negativity.

I can’t help you when you don’t put any effort to understand common sense.

I’d at least need to hear a trace of it first.

 

[adrift]

The tree of knowledge is known for its content which is the knowledge of Good and Evil. This means that Evil is as true as Good. Catholics however consider evil as lake of Good which is contrary to what is clearly claimed in the scripture. I was wondering how Catholic could defend their position. That seems a big misunderstanding to me.

.



Would someone explain what the OP is saying.

What does he mean that Catholics consider evil as lake of good???

 

[fhansen]

.



Would someone explain what the OP is saying.

What does he mean that Catholics consider evil as lake of good???

He meant *lack *of good.

 

[adrift]

He meant *lack *of good.

Oh, Thank you.

 

[Bahman]

See below

Yes? And Adam, Eve, and all humanity can rise again, to even greater heights! Their fall can be the beginning step in their rising to perfection.

You don’t pay any attention to my argument. We are in danger to fall again any time we rise because we are not perfect since an imperfect person finally fail considering the fact that s/he has to live eternally. It is very simple, consider a person who is imperfect and can live very very long. S/he eventually fails.

What’s superior, a being that is made perfect, forced to be perfect, or one who chooses perfection, after seeing and experiencing the other, imperfect side? Which is “more perfect”? God knows goodness and perfection by nature-because He is goodness and perfection. We experience it in a relative sense: the nearer we are to it, to Him, the more we experience it. We’re free to draw near, or to turn away. All creation is necessarily less perfect than its Creator. This in no way means that it wasn’t worthwhile to create. God, in His goodness, can provide all sufficient goodness-and beyond- to those who love Him.

Creation is a failure. Please read the previous comment.

Oh. Why? Did you just make that up? Is a child less satisfied than an adult for not knowing what an adult knows?

No, I didn’t made that up. I reach to this conclusion through contemplation. it is very simple to understand this. Wherever you go, no matter how high, you are in the danger to fall again since you are not perfect and have to live eternally. The creation is a failure if you cannot become God since it consists of infinite falls for each person which is miserable.

I’m satisfied with what He gives; He will deprive us of nothing we need in order to be boundlessly happy. Jealousy of Him will get us nowhere, but into chaos and negativity.

You could be happy of what he is giving you only in short term.

I’d at least need to hear a trace of it first.

So I repeat my argument again: Adam was made good since he knew what good means. Eve was also created good since Adam could know what lack of good means since she was absent at the first place hence there was no need to eat the fruit to understand what lack of good means.

 

[davidv]

You don’t pay any attention to my argument. We are in danger to fall again any time we rise because we are not perfect since an imperfect person finally fail considering the fact that s/he has to live eternally. It is very simple, consider a person who is imperfect and can live very very long. S/he eventually fails.

Creation is a failure. Please read the previous comment.

No, I didn’t made that up. I reach to this conclusion through contemplation. it is very simple to understand this. Wherever you go, no matter how high, you are in the danger to fall again since you are not perfect and have to live eternally. The creation is a failure if you cannot become God since it consists of infinite falls for each person which is miserable.

You could be happy of what he is giving you only in short term.

So I repeat my argument again: Adam was made good since he knew what good means. Eve was also created good since Adam could know what lack of good means since she was absent at the first place hence there was no need to eat the fruit to understand what lack of good means.

Adam was made good because God made him. Adam’s knowledge did not determine his goodness. God gave specific instructions as to what was not good.

 

[Bahman]

It is very simple my friend. Consider a container which contains something, love for example. The state of empty is opposite to full but it dose not have any value which can reflect anything meaningful. It is just empty. Hence hate is opposite of love which make love meaningful and vice versa. The state of lack of hate again is the state of neutral.

 

[Bahman]

Adam was made good because God made him. Adam’s knowledge did not determine his goodness. God gave specific instructions as to what was not good.

How a tree could be evil and good if good means the lack of good? Can you imagine such a state of being? You cannot.

 

[davidv]

It is very simple my friend. Consider a container which contains something, love for example. The state of empty is opposite to full but it dose not have any value which can reflect anything meaningful. It is just empty. Hence hate is opposite of love which make love meaningful and vice versa. The state of lack of hate again is the state of neutral.

What, if anything, does this have to do with the OP?
Is very clear that your understanding of the “tree” is deficient.

 

[Bahman]

What, if anything, does this have to do with the OP?

If a tree is evil then it lacks good since it cannot be good hence something cannot be good and evil at the same time. Simple.

Is very clear that your understanding of the “tree” is deficient.

I think that fits you better.

 

[adrift]

Catholics however consider evil as lake of Good which is contrary to what is clearly claimed in the scripture. I was wondering how Catholic could defend their position. That seems a big misunderstanding to me.

If you have already stated this, please point me to the post. You make statements as if they are fact without backing them up.

You say that it is clearly claimed in scripture yet you provide no scripture to justify your statements.

 

[davidv]

If a tree is evil

What if the tree isn’t evil?

then it lacks good since it cannot be good hence something cannot be good and evil at the same time. Simple.

Unsound logic. It has not been established that the tree is evil.

I think that fits you better.

Why?

 

[Bahman]

What if the tree isn’t evil?

So you don’t believe Bible. It is clearly stated that the tree contain the knowledge of good and evil.

Unsound logic. It has not been established that the tree is evil.

It is well stated in the Bible.

Why?

Why not?

 

[Bahman]

If you have already stated this, please point me to the post. You make statements as if they are fact without backing them up.

You say that it is clearly claimed in scripture yet you provide no scripture to justify your statements.

Genesis 2:17: The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.

 

[davidv]

So you don’t believe Bible.

Kindly refrain from telling me what I don’t believe.

It is clearly stated that the tree contain the knowledge of good and evil.

No it doesn’t.

9] And out of the ground the LORD God made to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food, the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Where does this say that the tree is a container?

It is well stated in the Bible.

No it is not.

Why not?

Because I have numerous years of bible study with very knowledgeable teachers.

 

[adrift]

Genesis 2:17: The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.

That does not support your statement that evil as lack of Good is contrary to what is clearly claimed in the scripture. Do you have more or is that it?

 

[fhansen]

So you don’t believe Bible. It is clearly stated that the tree contain the knowledge of good and evil.

It is well stated in the Bible.

Why not?

The tree doesn’t contain evil. The tree is symbolic- and eating of it’s fruit is symbolic- for nothing else than an act of disobedience of God. That act, itself, “contained” evil-it was evil-and therefore, by its nature transmitted the original knowledge of evil to humankind. By that act humankind stood in a state outside the will of God, outside of communion with God, an unjust and chaotic state of being for man. All other evil (sin) would flow from and be related to that first act of disobedience. The knowledge of evil would therefore become the norm for man, in a sense, as it spread.

 

[Bahman]

Kindly refrain from telling me what I don’t believe.

What do you believe? You believe that God is good. He however created a tree which has the knowledge of good and evil which is contrary to the concept of God goodness. Hence you are in a paradoxical situation that you cannot resolve. So you define evil as lack of good which doesn’t resolve the paradox since evil is real. First because you experience it yet deny it. Moreover you are trapped since you cannot possibly comprehend what could the tree of knowledge mean when evil is interpreted as lack of good since if the tree is evil then it could not be good and vice versa.

No it doesn’t.

It does. Geneses 2:17.

Where does this say that the tree is a container?

What would like to call instead of container? The tree has the fruit which was forbidden since you would know the knowledge of good and evil when you eat it.

No it is not.

It does. Geneses 2:17.

Because I have numerous years of bible study with very knowledgeable teachers.

So you and your teacher are mislead since you cannot provide a consistence picture to me by providing a solid argument!

 

[Bahman]

That does not support your statement that evil as lack of Good is contrary to what is clearly claimed in the scripture. Do you have more or is that it?

It is simple to understand this:

1. Evil is absence of good (what you believe)
2. There exists a tree with the fruit which eating the fruit grants the knowledge of good and evil
3. You cannot possibly have a fruit which could contain the knowledge of evil and good because of (1). In simple word, the fruit cannot be good if it is evil.
4. This means that either (1) or (2) is wrong, the first one is your interpretation of good and evil whereas the second is the denial of what is clearly stated in Bible

Which one do you pick up (from (4))?

 

[Bahman]

The tree doesn’t contain evil. The tree is symbolic- and eating of it’s fruit is symbolic- for nothing else than an act of disobedience of God. That act, itself, “contained” evil-it was evil-and therefore, by its nature transmitted the original knowledge of evil to humankind. By that act humankind stood in a state outside the will of God, outside of communion with God, an unjust and chaotic state of being for man. All other evil (sin) would flow from and be related to that first act of disobedience. The knowledge of evil would therefore become the norm for man, in a sense, as it spread.

Oh yeah, I know what symbolic mean: it means that God lied to Adam to Eve. Moreover you have no Biblical reference to support your idea which means that what you state is man made to avoid the inconsistency which lies in Bible.