Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Charlemagne
In fact, I don't think this question needs to be answered. In the webpage, The Beginning of the Universe, I discuss possibilities that the scientific and Biblical viewpoints can be reconciled for an old earth creationist.
Traditionally, the book of Gensis was written by Moses over 3000 years ago. As we look at it from a philosophical level, consider how someone in the Bronze age could have such a deep level of insight.
This is the "original" sin that taints all of mankind. God tells Adam to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Eve is tempted and eats the fruit of the tree. Their eyes are opened to the fact of their nakedness.
Simply put, this sin marks all humans with a separation from God which is passed down until Jesus breaks the curse as discussed in Romans 5.
If you want more detail or discussion about this story in Genesis 2 & 3 there are many pastors and theologians who have written about the story in detail. This page is focused on one particular detail.
The key point is that the only rule which Adam and Eve were given was that they not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This seems like a crazy request. What makes this fruit so special?
In the AI webpage, we discussed two key points which relate to this story. There was the discussion of deep learning, where computer scientist are building systems based upon the neural pathways of human brains. These systems work more autonomously than traditional computer programs making judgement calls as part of the process. For humans to function autonomously, we would need to have the ability to make judgement calls.
But good or bad is different than good or evil. Good and evil have a moral component. There is an identification of something bigger than the individuals desires, rather a proper social order. After all, many people would consider running around a gardens with a naked partner as good! But they were uncomfortable with the idea of showing their nakedness to God which brought shame because it felt wrong.
Also in the AI webpage, there is the discussion that Homo Sapiens are different than hominids. Homo Sapiens show a communal progression of growth unlike the earlier hominids. This implies an ability to think about good and evil from a perspective that goes beyond the individual.
Do you see the connections? In both cases, judgement calls need to be made, decisions are not just instinctual, but rather decided by what it good or evil.
The actual sin is the disobeying God's order, but why the heck is the tree even in the garden? If God is all powerful and all seeing, doesn't he know that what is going to happen? In polite company, people don't ask these type of questions, but they are valid.
There are some lines of theology which say that God didn't know for certain that Adam and Eve would eat of it. Still, he knew that they could eat it. If he knew they could eat it, then he had a design to placing the tree in the garden. God either had a purpose for the test or for the outcome after Eve ate of the fruit. The later seems more probable and is the assumption I make. God had a design from the beginning if Adam and Eve ate of the fruit.
Death entered the world. Spiritually, man lost his perfect communion with God. This could be the saddest day in history.
Did man gain anything? Were his eyes opened to Good and Evil? The fact that they became aware of their nakedness seems to say that there is a difference in Adam and Eve.
When God created Adam and Eve, things were very good. He knew they were special. Could they fulfill his purpose of a partnership? It definitely feels that way when he has them name the animals and God creates Eve to help Adam in his struggles. A partnership in the creation is growing.
But there are several real questions and one great threat. How can there be a true partnership without both parties having a free will? Think of a marriage where one partner dominates the other -- that is not a partnership, its more of a owner and slave relationship. The second question is, can there truly be a partnership if the one side cannot make proper judgement calls? With only one side being able to make good decisions, handicaps the relationship greatly.
These two questions seem to point that God intentionally placed the tree in the garden to find out if his perfect creation had the quality of free will and critical moral thinking. As an interesting side note, I wonder if there wasn't anything special about the fruit, because before Eve eats it, she freely decides that it is a good thing. As stated in the paragraph about deep learning AI, this opportunity opens up a great risk with both great reward and great hurt. Don't you think God already knew this?
Now, the horrible threat. Death will occur when the humans make a free will decision and disobey God. This is not a "curse" as much as it is a matter of cause and effect. Philosophically, you can go down several rabbit trails as to why and how this occurs, but let's stay focused on the main thing. Spiritual life occurs when humans are in partnership with God. Spiritual death occurs when we run away from him.
Let's go back to our example of Deep Learning AI. Man can only train a computer so far and so fast. Part of the idea behind deep learning is that the computer begins to understand what a good solution is. Yet, think of all of the movies where the "smart" computers turn against humankind. It is the ability to decide what is good and evil that is the key change in the artificial intelligence. So we understand that this one basic moral judgment drives a full potential of outcomes. And yet, this might be the most sublime judgement call that humans make.
And the fact that in our complex world, these decisions become seemingly more complex every day. In the world of AI, the judgement calls can be simple, given the systems are designed for simple outcomes. Humans are not afforded such simplicity.
These basic concepts actually feed upon a basic human fear -- that we are found lacking. We all judge ourselves in one manner or another. Sometimes we judge ourselves against others, sometimes against a moral code. In the end, we are looking for some self-validation to our existence.
Many religions feed off of self awareness and judgements. To try to become something better, humans design religious systems that would control our actions and thoughts. We design complex rules to drive us to do good. In the end, the systems are designed to prove to ourselves that we are doing good things.
Gerard De Nerval once said, "The tree of knowledge is not the tree of life! And yet can we cast out of our spirits all the good or evil poured into them by so many learned generations?"
God doesn't want any human to perish and he wants us to have an ability to judge what is good and evil. There is no going back on the fact that we make good and evil choices -- both in our mental constructs and in our everyday lives. And yet. we are all special to him. Humans are diminished when they don't have a moral conscious. The problem is, if he creates a world where humans don't have an ability to consider good and evil then they will never reach their full potential. But to let them reach their full potential means that there will be horrible losses along the way.
At this point, many people will get angry with God. At times, I have. There are three truths which bring comfort to me.
Number one, he is the creator, we are the created. What right do we have to judge him on his creation? I know my perspective is limited.
Secondly, he has provided a "reset switch", a path which humans can follow to escape the curse of the knowledge of good and evil. This is the whole purpose of Jesus' coming. To provide a way for us to trust in God that the final outcome is best for everyone. We may not have his perspective, we may have trouble trusting him, but if we can trust that Jesus' death was not the end of his existence, then we can trust that there is a final solution which works.
And thirdly, remember this is only a theory. I don't portend to know the mind of God. The only reason this theory is written is to give one possible, logical way to understand one of the basic dilemmas of life. In no way, do I say this is the only solution or the way things are. It is just one possible interpretation that brings logic to the realities presented to me.
Finally, remember, the fact that a man wrote the concept of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil over three thousand years ago, in a low technological society, is quite a miracle. Could someone come up with this on their own? Why would anyone say that the knowledge of good and evil caused the separation of man from God? Isn't there great wisdom in the Old Testament? Now, let's go to a similar idea, the creation of the world.
Copywrite ThinkReality.org
Powered by GoDaddyI