@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:
Quote:Obviously they already knew it was evil to eat from that tree before they took the fruit, i.e. because God told them to avoid it.
It’s hard to ignore the obvious contradictions here.
Unless you mean that God was such a prick as to say to himself-
'They already know this, but I’m going to tell them that they do not. Then I’ll put this ordinary old tree here and tell them it will magically give it to them. You know, **** with their heads a little. Then tell'em they'll die, just to make sure they take the choice seriously.'
In case I have to say it, the last sentence there is the only one I actually believe.
God told them the truth, that they could choose from all the other trees/fruits. Then He told them that if they choose from the one tree, they would 'surely die.'
Think back to Trump's poison Skittle bowl: Someone offers you to take Skittles from a bowl that contains some poison Skittles. You know that if you get a poison Skittle, you will 'surely die,' even though there are some Skittles in the bowl that aren't poison.
So the serpent comes and lies to them and says the only reason God doesn't want them to eat from the poison Skittles bowl is that doing so will allow them to understand poison, as God does. So if they believe the serpent, they are going to go ahead and eat from that bowl and end up poisoning themselves, and as they lie there dying from the poison, the serpent is going to say, "see, now you understand how poison works, just as God does," and God is going to say, "see I told you that you would surely die if you eat from that bowl."
Now was God bad for warning you that you would 'surely die' if you ate from the bowl of poison Skittles, or was the serpent bad for tricking you into doing so and killing yourself?
