Searching for GOD...

[floo]

You may see it as an argument against theism, but the whole Christian bible is centred around our ability to discern good and evil, and to freely choose between them.  The first book of the bible:
"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."  Genesis 2:16-17
To me this indicates that before the fall, mankind had no knowledge of evil - but the gift of freedom to choose led to our discovery and experience of evil.  Without this knowledge we may never fully appreciate what our eternal salvation in heaven entails.

OK if Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil, god set them up!

[Alan Burns]

And you still think that in the 21st century? It's almost mediaeval in concept. How can you suspend your disbelief to think that there was such an event as the "fall"?  How do you equate that with the well-tested Theory of Evolution? *deep sighs*

The theory of evolution can't be used to explain our ability to freely choose between good and evil.

[Sebastian Toe]

The theory of evolution can't be used to explain our ability to freely choose between good and evil.

Yes it can.

[Enki]

You may see it as an argument against theism, but the whole Christian bible is centred around our ability to discern good and evil, and to freely choose between them.  The first book of the bible:
"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."  Genesis 2:16-17
To me this indicates that before the fall, mankind had no knowledge of evil - but the gift of freedom to choose led to our discovery and experience of evil.  Without this knowledge we may never fully appreciate what our eternal salvation in heaven entails.

You might be interested in this by a certain Daniel Miessler:

Let’s take the Garden of Eden narrative. Here you have God, controlling the entire environment. The laws of physics, the desires of Adam and Eve, the desirability of the tree, the presence of the snake, etc. So he creates a piece of fruit on a tree that’s so dangerous it will kill him (and everyone in the whole world after him).

Not only does he create the fruit, but he gives Adam both the eyes to see it with, as well as the desire to eat it. Then, next to him, he creates two other beings–both of which try and convince him to eat it. Keep in mind that Adam could have been created without ears, so he couldn’t hear Eve and the snake, but that would be too easy.

So, when Adam is about to take a bite of the apple, what is the balance of natural pressure vs. free will at that moment?

which is taken from a much larger piece here:

https://danielmiessler.com/blog/free-will-and-punishment/

where he puts forward the argument that the aim of 'decisions, both as an individual and as a society, to either punish or rehabilitate criminals hinges on the degree to which the former believes in free will vs. determinism.'

The whole piece isn't very long and, I suggest, well worth reading.

[wigginhall]

OK if Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil, god set them up!

That seems right, although I guess AB will carry on his minuet, in order to deny it.   Either God created evil, and set humans up for a fall, or evil just exists in its own right in the universe.   The latter view tends towards dualism and religions such as Zoroastrianism.   For Christians, evil mysteriously appears in the middle of nowhere.   Nothing to do with me, mate.

Terrific link, enki. 

[Maeght]

The theory of evolution can't be used to explain our ability to freely choose between good and evil.

Don't see why not.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

OK if Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil, god set them up!

I did ask Wigginhall to explain how free will induces people to evil.
Answer was there none.
If they had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good what was the motivation for finding out?
You've guessed it.........to gain knowledge of evil.
Adam and Eve are thus caught......bang to rights.

[ippy]

The theory of evolution can't be used to explain our ability to freely choose between good and evil.

Absolute tripe, others have condemed you to a life of near fantasy, I and probably quite a few others, can only see you as an extreme example of as near to total indoctrination it's possible to get, you're a very sad case Alan.

You even try to intellectualise this idea, that's all it is an idea, of free will, why not try to intellectualise the idea of making pea soup? It would be an equally good cause and about as usefull.

ippy

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Illogicallist,

If they had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good what was the motivation for finding out?

Presumably, if they "had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good" they wouldn't have known that they were finding out about evil would they - just more good?

Incidentally, you of all people complaining that someone else hasn't answered a question is a bit rich isn't it?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad the Illogicallist,

Presumably, if they "had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good" they wouldn't have known that they were finding out about evil would they - just more good?

Incidentally, you of all people complaining that someone else hasn't answered a question is a bit rich isn't it?

I thought you would make that error. God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.

[floo]

I thought you would make that error. God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.

So god set them up!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So god set them up!

No. they wanted knowledge of evil and pursued it.

[floo]

No. they wanted knowledge of evil and pursued it.

Which is fair enough, but god introduced them to it first, so god is entirely to blame.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Which is fair enough, but god introduced them to it first, so god is entirely to blame.

No he didn't he warned them of it. What they wanted was knowledge of evil.
They therefore broke trust in and with God, all in the pursuit of evil.
It is down to them twice over in effect.
God becomes the villain from the point of Adam and Eve, fear and guilt and misplaced blame enter the system. As does spurious mitigation and trivialising of responsibility

[floo]

No he didn't he warned them of it. What they wanted was knowledge of evil.
They therefore broke trust in and with God, all in the pursuit of evil.
It is down to them twice over in effect.
God becomes the villain from the point of Adam and Eve, fear and guilt and misplaced blame enter the system. As does spurious mitigation and trivialising of responsibility

It set them up!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It set them up!

I don't suppose you are going to explain how having warned Adam and Eve of Evil they first break trust in the pursuit of knowledge of evil is somehow a "set up".

[Sebastian Toe]

No he didn't he warned them of it. What they wanted was knowledge of evil.
They therefore broke trust in and with God, all in the pursuit of evil.
It is down to them twice over in effect.
God becomes the villain from the point of Adam and Eve, fear and guilt and misplaced blame enter the system. As does spurious mitigation and trivialising of responsibility

Just to be clear.
Are you saying that there was an actual Adam and an actual Eve, pursuing knowledge of evil?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Just to be clear.
Are you saying that there was an actual Adam and an actual Eve, pursuing knowledge of evil?

Me? I think it's a tale of what happens to us all.Except Jesus.
Of course it's only half the story. The second half being reconciliation with God or otherwise.

In terms of Adam and Eve it depends on whether you think a trait appears throughout a population simultaneously or whether such a random mutation appears in a limited kinship group, say cousins in a family.

[Walter]

Just to be clear.
Are you saying that there was an actual Adam and an actual Eve, pursuing knowledge of evil?

OH! I cant wait for this answer   

[Walter]

Me? I think it's a tale of what happens to us all.Except Jesus.
Of course it's only half the story. The second half being reconciliation with God or otherwise.

In terms of Adam and Eve it depends on whether you think a trait appears throughout a population simultaneously or whether such a random mutation appears in a limited kinship group, say cousins in a family.

Told ya!

[ippy]

I thought you would make that error. God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.

When and where is the evidence that this he she or it figure of yours even exists to be able to provide anything, including requisite knowledge of this idea you like to refer to as evil?

You like the rest of you religiousosos need to prove your case before it's even worth a discussion.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

When and where is the evidence that this he she or it figure of yours even exists to be able to provide anything, including requisite knowledge of this idea you like to refer to as evil?


ippy

A moral reality independent of what the physical circumstances. Try doing without one. An evolved morality has to be morally real for instance. But the resultant morality is emerged and independent of physical considerations.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Contradictionist,

I thought you would make that error.

So funny.

God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.

Speaking of error though...

Vlad statement 1:  “If they had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good what was the motivation for finding out?”

Vlad statement 2: “God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.”

If they only "knew of good", then no amount of prohibition from this “god” of yours would have warned them that they risked discovering evil. Anything they might have discovered could only have seemed to them potentially still more good. It was a risk-free, consequence-free choice. 

You can populate the myth as you please either with statement 1 or with statement 2, but not with both.

Take your pick.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Irrationalist,

But the resultant morality is emerged and independent of physical considerations.

Half right, half wrong. Morality is an emergent property all right, but it can't be "independent of physical considerations" - at least not unless you can manage first to demonstrate a non-physical, and then show that it's a suitable medium for a free-floating morality to occupy. No physical (eg people) = no morality, which is why for example there's no morality on the moon.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad the Contradictionist,

So funny.

Speaking of error though...

Vlad statement 1:  “If they had no knowledge of good and evil but only Good what was the motivation for finding out?”

Vlad statement 2: “God has already provided the requisite knowledge of evil by telling them what they should not do. They went against God and hence had experienced evil prior to eating the fruit.”

If they only "knew of good", then no amount of prohibition from this “god” of yours would have warned them that they risked discovering evil. Anything they might have discovered could only have seemed to them potentially still more good. It was a risk-free, consequence-free choice. 

You can populate the myth as you please either with statement 1 or with statement 2, but not with both.

Take your pick.

Let me talk you through it all again
Adam and Eve enjoy communion with God in a state of Edenic bliss.
They are given an instruction to avoid the knowledge of good and evil.
They already enjoy the good and are told to avoid evil.
They thus know that evil, whatever it is, is to be avoided.
They go against God.......break trust
In pursuit of evil.

They had requisite knowledge of evil as that which must be avoided.
They desired direct knowledge of what they knew was to be avoided.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Adam and Eve, mankind are therefore culpable of breach of trust and of disbelieving God and of having a lucky dip, a punt, a gamble.