the tree of knowledge

[mystagogia87]

Something I can’t understand about the story of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is this:

Why didn’t God want them to have the knowledge of good and evil? I thought that part of how we were made in the image of God was the fact that we have a sense of right and wrong. Even St. Paul said that God wrote his moral law upon our hearts.

So, why in the Genesis story does it say that God didn’t WANT them to know there was such a thing as a moral law?

 

[Timothysis]

Adam and Eve were both given a divine decree that they not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Their faith and trust should have been placed in God instead of the selfish desire to do what they wanted. And isn’t that what sin is, putting ourselves before God? Their sin was disobedience to God and thus they suffered the consequences.

 

[mystagogia87]

Thank you for your reply, but you haven’t addressed what’s bothering me.

Is the knowledge of good and evil a result of sin? Or is the moral law written on the hearts of all men, as St. Paul says?

 

[Monica4316]

I recently read a book called ‘Perelandra’ by CS Lewis… it’s a fictional story about a man from earth meeting two unfallen people on another planet, - and trying to stop the devil from tempting them. These people in the story, had no notion of good and evil in the beginning. Specifically the woman, the ‘Eve’ character, - she had no idea that it’s even possible to disobey God. Later on, when they proved their obedience to God, He actually showed them about earth and what happened here and they learned the whole story, though not by disobedience.

I think it might be that Adam and Eve had no idea that they could disobey, and for them it was only God’s will… and perhaps, maybe they were forbidden to eat the apple so they could freely choose obedience to God. However, they disobeyed. I don’t know it’s all just speculation.

 

[beehumble]

I think it could mean they would gain the knowledge of the consequence of sin, and then they would see how it contrasts with being ‘good’, with obeying God. Having never experienced absence of God, the ‘fruit’ of the tree is separation from God and what that brings - toil and labor to feed ourselves, pain to give birth etc.

Compare this to Jesus’ saying we will know them by their fruits. The word ‘fruit’ in Scripture most times means the ‘effect or result’. The fruit of the eating from the forbidden tree is the knowledge of the consequence of sin (which also means we then understand that all we had previous to the eating from the tree was the result of our being in obedience to God, of our being ‘good’. Thus we gain knowledge of the effect of obedience - being good - versus the effect of disobedience - being evil).

The Bible doesn’t identify the fruit because the physical fruit is not important to the story, it is the spiritual fruit, the result of our action, that is the point.

My opinion anyway.

God bless you.

 

[Timothysis]

Thank you for your reply, but you haven’t addressed what’s bothering me.

Is the knowledge of good and evil a result of sin? Or is the moral law written on the hearts of all men, as St. Paul says?

Adam and Eve were in a state of perfect Justice in the garden. Knowing that they could choose between obeying God or following their own desires seems to imply that they should have some inkling between right and wrong. Their disobedience led to a state of concupiscence whereby it became natural for them (and us) to seek our own passions and desire instead of putting God first. Basically, they/we assumed a fallen state lacking in Justice. While the moral law is written on the hearts of all men we still seek our own ends which are often contrary to the will of God. I would say, then, that the knowledge of good and evil is a result of our fallen nature instead of sin properly.