Thoughts on what might be the claim to know 'the knowledge of good and evil'.

[RandomThoughts]

First, the serpent offered the knowledge of good and evil in the garden. But the serpent is a liar, so it would make sense that it is not true knowledge of good and evil.

It may be the claim to know what God considers good and evil. If you claim to be sure of the mind of God, or to know as much as God, you may be claiming to know the knowledge of good and evil.

Might the claim to be able to judge another be that very thing? That could be true for any claim to be sure of the will of God and what he thinks is best?

It is true we can do our best to order society with our best ability to maintain justice, but in all things I think we should know that the ways of God are beyond the knowledge of any man, and in that our judgements should be tempered with mercy and love.

While we all sometimes make judgments of what is right or wrong in society and for ourselves, I think we have to accept we could be wrong, and to listen to others and try to learn from people that share that spirit of goodness we believe comes from God. In that I think we can do as best we can to honor God while we live in an imperfect form.

Although this is based on my belief that God is about mercy and love, I have to admit that is based on my faith, and my choice of how to worship God, not a claim to know, but a claim to believe his ways are of kindness and love.

So it is just my thoughts on it, and since I am imperfect, people may have different thoughts, which would be interesting to hear. Although we can say what we think is the best ways in things, to claim them to be the same as the will of God seems to be like claiming to have the knowledge of good and evil.

[Towlie]

1. It's a whole lot easier to figure out if you just leave the Bible out of it.

[RandomThoughts]

2. By claiming the Bible should be left out of the discussion, aren't you doing the same thing?

There are many great thoughts and inspirations that I believe come from the spirit of God in the Bible. And all parts have some meaning, but alot of it is interpretation.

If you immediately dismiss it, or make a blanket statement to leave it out, aren't you making the same judgement that those that make their interpretation of the Bible the only thing that matters?

Different faiths have different interpretations of the Bible, just like your statement is an interpretation that it should be 'left out' you do no different then anyone else in that statement.

[elshiva]

4. How about this for morality?

[Towlie]

5. I mean that you know much more about good and evil than our primitive ignorant ancestors did,

so why compromise your thoughts on the subject by trying to reconcile them with their confused scribblings? For all you know, that creation tale was meant as nothing more than a bedtime story for children.

[RandomThoughts]

6. Well I don't know what I know, or if it is right, I just have some ideas.

But I assume the 'you' is more people in general and not directed at me.

But I think I understand your point, you are questioning my premise by questioning the source material that it is built on. In other words if you do not believe the original creation story, then commenting on it would have no meaning to you.

But I posted the thread because it is part of many peoples beliefs, so is relevant to some people. Although many have different thoughts on how much is metaphor and how much is exact literal truth.

And I just thought it was an interesting thought on that topic, and for those that believe the creation story it might be interesting, it may not have interest to people who might believe as you stated, however some stories continue to exist for many years because of their inherent truths, so its longevity may give it some claim as truth even if you do not believe in the other doctrines around it.

I think it is interesting, although I agree people will see it differently based on their own choice of thoughts.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. I always took it to mean duality

In the beginning was Unity. In order to know itself, Unity had to create duality. But to experience duality, Unity had to take bits and peaces of Itself and send them away from Unity. The creation myth you describe is a garbled version of this.

[RandomThoughts]

7. I think I understand your view.

Is it the view that the knowledge of good and evil was the separation of things into different ideas of what is right and wrong?

In that it might be a creation of the ability to judge things.

Sort of what I said.

However there are some that say nothing is right or wrong, I do not believe that,

I only say we can't always claim with 100% certainty that we know what is right or wrong or are on the right side always.

I started thinking on the idea after thinking more on Lincoln's quote, and the common statement that the Lord works in mysterious ways.

"...I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side." - Abraham Lincoln.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

14. You don't quite understand

Duality is more than just "right and wrong". It is all the contrasts, all the separate entities that appear to exist--so I am apart and different than you, for example, rather than both of us being part of the greater entity. The basic concept here is that there is only One Being who, in order to experience and understand itself, created the illusion of separation and duality.

In this concept of Reality, which is found in many mystical traditions, "good" and "evil" are relative, and depend upon the individual doing the interpretation. Because of this, you are absolutely correct that no one can claim with 100% certainty that we know what is right or wrong. I am not saying that nothing is right or wrong, but rather that these aren't static concepts, but change as things change.

[RandomThoughts]

16. Thanks for explaining further.

Are you saying that the knowledge of good and evil would be flawed because in a world where things change, then knowledge is a trap, since learning is always required, and any claim to complete knowledge means you refuse to continue to learn?

I also do not believe any person is all bad or all good, we all have both better and worse moments, but I believe society is moving to better paths over time. I don't say this saying I know all that is good, or all that is bad, but that the one that does know those things guides us if we listen to our heart. That's how I view it.

It may be that you are saying mistakes are part of the whole, so bad things are not bad, but part of some total existence, my worry about that is some people take that as a rational to do what they think is bad with a claim that it is part of existence and hence an acceptable action or thought.

How does the duality, what I believe to be a concept of balance, argue that sometimes bad is part of things? Does that argue make it acceptable? Does it say people should not be looking for improvement, or a state where they leave as much bad behind as possible? Or am I misunderstanding the idea of what is bad in the idea of balance?

I do agree that much of what people call bad or good is interpretation. But there are some things almost everyone agrees falls on one side or the other. It seems the statement you made moves good and bad, to best interpretation of what we think is good, and in many cases we later see what we thought was good was not good. So did what is good really change? or is what is really good a cumulative decision of society, making good and bad change as peoples interpretations and thoughts change? I find a trap in that because it almost makes peer thought the defining of what is right and wrong, instead of inherent truths I think we should strive to understand.

Wait, I might get part of that, the idea that people are inherently good, makes peer thought better able to define good anyway. In some ways the argument for transparency and even the ideas of shining a light on that which is wrong, are ideas that society is more good then bad, and will stop things bad if done in not allowed to be done in secret.

I guess the basic question I would have is how does the acceptance of bad and good handle the concept that it is better to be good? Or does it not have that concept? If it does not, then does it justify those that do bad?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

19. What is said is

that whatever gets you closer to remembering what God truly is is worth doing; that which makes you forget is not. A Sufi saying is: The only sin is forgetting; the only blessing remembering.

[ZombieHorde]

8. "the serpent is a liar"

No, the serpent told the truth, it was God lied in that story.

An interesting thing about that story is, if they did not know good and evil, how would they know it was wrong to disobey God?

[RandomThoughts]

9. First off, almost all people lie at one time or another.

But the serpent, as seen in that story, always lies since he does not know truth.

In my comment, I was saying that the claim that one is right, or the claim to know the difference from good and evil in all cases, is the deception put on people.

You do make a point I have heard before.

Its alot of thoughts on the possibilities of the meanings of the story, and I have heard multiple interpretations.

There are some that think doing wrong is not the problem, it is knowing that they did wrong or 'shame'. I would say shame is a consequence that was only added by doing wrong. So the shame is part of wrong, and when the wrong is removed by accepting forgiveness, and some believe with atonement, the shame has no power. Although atonement may be some peoples ways to accept forgiveness.

And true forgiveness also requires an honest attempt to do better or not repeat something. In my view.


An interesting thing about that story is, if they did not know good and evil, how would they know it was wrong to disobey God?

Many speak of two parts of honoring God, obedience and living in good ways. There are many different views of the balance or meaning of the differences of those two items, but the first thing they did was to break obedience, which God gave them the choice to follow, and in my belief gave them the free will to decide not to.

In my statement in the OP the knowledge of good and evil is not just knowing if something is bad to do, most have a conscious that guides us on that. What i think of as the heart given by God. I was sorta asking, is it possible that the knowledge of good and evil is the same as blasphemy or claiming to know the mind of God. Claiming to know for sure, when I believe belief is faith, and the best attempt to honor God, knowing we are imperfect.

[skepticscott]

13. Meaningless babble

if they didn't know good from evil, or right from wrong, how could they possibly "break" obedience (assuming that means anything to begin with)? For all they knew, disobeying god was every bit as much the right thing to do as obeying him.

[RandomThoughts]

17. Well my original thought was that the knowledge of good and evil

is not a state without a conscious, or no knowledge of what is good. It is a claim to have perfect knowledge of what is right or wrong, and in that it becomes judgement. And no person can understand things enough to make a 100% claim on that.

I think your definition of knowledge of good and evil is different then the one I stated in the OP. I am saying they could know right from wrong without the apple, but the apple gave them a claim to believe they knew 100%.

Although you could make the argument if they did not know 100% how could they be held guilty for anything, since they did not know. And it could even explain God's mercy and love even when we make mistakes. In cases where we make mistakes because we are flawed we still can share in God's love through his mercy. Which makes sense since we are not perfect and that would make sense to be weighed by adding mercy.

But in the case of the apple, they did know it was wrong, but wanted to obtain something not theirs, or something beyond peoples ability to understand. Maybe they wanted to take the knowledge instead of be given it when ready. (Just thinking on different ideas on the story.)

I do agree for the 'knowledge of good and evil' to be the same thing as having a conscious, the story has little meaning. So I was thinking of different possibilities of what it might mean.

[ZombieHorde]

23. "always lies since he does not know truth."

Is there any Biblical evidence for this claim?

[Lint Head]

10. The Eden story is a metaphor for the way mankind came to

understand good and evil. In the far reaches of outer space when a planet is destroyed by the expansion of a nearby sun that is not an 'evil' act. It is a natural occurrence. When you bring a conscience mind or reasoning into the equation the act of destruction can be interpreted as 'evil' or premeditated. Evil is a relative term based on the belief of a higher or lower being. If there was no evil or bad occurrences there would be no good or positive occurrences. This is not just a ying and yang concept it is a scientific concept. For every action there is a reaction. This is provable using physics. There has to be opposite existence for existence to exist. There are positive and negative bodies in atoms that make up everything.

Good and bad are conscience mind concepts that mankind has defined. The animal kingdom does not have a good and bad concept unless it is defined by us to the animal.

This question and argument of how good and evil can be understood is a futile one but very interesting to discuss.
Communication down through eons of human exitence have defined and re-defind what is good and what is bad or evil.
What was considered good or OK in society 50 years ago is not good today. It's called smoking.
:dem:

[Towlie]

12. No, it's not a "scientific concept".

If there was no evil or bad occurrences there would be no good or positive occurrences. This is not just a ying and yang concept it is a scientific concept.

That may be an aspect of someone's philosophy, conjured up to excuse all the evil in the world while still maintaining that God is good, but it's certainly not a "scientific concept" in any rational sense. Just because many examples of opposites exist in nature, that doesn't mean that evil is necessary for the existence of good.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

15. You're trying to equate philosophical arguments with physics and it doesn't work

The "good and bad are conscience mind concepts" doesn't come close to being anything like the "positive and negative bodies in atoms". You're trying to equate two completely different types of things - it's not even an apples/oranges thing; you're trying to compare snakes and ball bearings.

[provis99]

11. Good and evil are just matters of opinion; good and evil are all relative.

For example, I believe the Bible is a book of evil that promotes complacency and evil; but I suppose your opinion would be different. So how do we reconcile these different opinions?

[RandomThoughts]

18. By looking at the fruits.

If something is bad, it should create worse ends, if something is good it should create better ends. Now this also depends on what you think is good or bad ends. Like a racist might think suffering or death of a group not their own was good, but a normal person would think it bad. So their is a relativeness to the fruits, but I think societal consensus leans to more good then bad.

There are many parts of the Bible that speak of loving your neighbor, and ideas of sharing and caring. So I would say there may be some interpretations of the bible that lead people to good things, but there are also some bad interpretations that lead people to worse ways to live.

I think we could reconcile the difference by agreeing that some interpretations lead to better things, and some do not. Then finding which ones seem to be better for society. However in each case the Bible itself is not to be rewarded or blamed, but the interpretation of the Bible. It is even mentioned that the spirit used to read scripture is important, possibly speaking of how different interpretations can be created by the spirit of the reader.

Of coarse we would have to also agree what is 'better'. For instance if one of us thought what is best for the 'self' is most important, and the other thought what is best for society is best, we would have a different measure of what good fruits are, so that would have to be thought on before you could even think on what actions or thoughts are best, since end goals might be different.

This last paragraph is important because we all have different thoughts of how much treating the self first, and treating others first is important. And what balance is best for both happiness and prosperous society.

[Jeffersonian Dem]

20. The "Forbidden Fruit"

Don't forget it's the "forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" that caused the "original sin."

Lot's of people have thought that the "fruit" was an apple, and many have thought that the "original sin" had something to do with sex.

Not so, at least not according to my teacher.

He says there is a very good reason why Jesus of Nazareth said: "When you eye is single you shall see the kingdom of heaven that is at hand," and "your body will be full of Light."

With a "single eye" we see beyond the illusion of duality. But, if we indulge in the "forbidden fruit" of the mind and unwittingly suffer from egocentric delusion, we judge for ourselves what is good and what is evil, and we judge others accordingly, and usually unfairly or wrongly.

That is why Jesus said: "Judge not, lest you be judged."

Who's my teacher? David J. Nunson.

http://lamebeavermusic.bravehost.com
http://www.soundclick.com/davidjnunson

[struggle4progress]

22. That the fruit was an apple, is an old joke, based on a Latin pun

[rug]

21. It always truck me as a form of self consciousness, a sapience animals do not have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapience

The complete name of our subspecies is homo sapiens sapiens.

[Jeffersonian Dem]

24. Wisdom vs Judgment

According to that Wikipedia site, Sapience is often defined as wisdom, or the ability of an organism or entity to act with appropriate judgment, and the word sapience is derived from the Latin word sapientia, meaning wisdom.

However, Wisdom is not the same as Judgment, because often people judge wrongly, without Wisdom.

Consider the Book of Wisdom, which was not included in the Protestant Bibles. It defines Wisdom as “beneficent, kind, firm, secure, all-seeing, and pervading all spirits. Wisdom penetrates and pervades all things by reason. She is the aura of the power of God, the radiance of the eternal Divine Light, a spotless mirror of God. And she can do all things and renews all things, and passing into holy souls from age to age, she produces friends of God and prophets.”

The great and wise Solomon in Proverbs 9 wrote: “Wisdom has built her house and she calls to all: Come, eat my food and drink my wine and you will live abundant life and walk in the ways of understanding. Forsake the foolish, and live. Go in the way of understanding. For the fear of the Lord God is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. For by me your days shall be multiplied, and the years of your life shall be increased.”

Solomon also wrote: “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and not on your own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge God, and God shall direct your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. ... My son, do not despise chastening of the Lord, nor be weary of his correction. For whoever the Lord loves are corrected; even as a parent does the child in whom he delights. Happy is the man that finds wisdom, and the man that gets understanding. ... For She is more precious than rubies: and all the things you can desire are not to be compared unto her. Length of days is in her right hand; and in her left hand riches and honor. Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retains her. The Lord God by Wisdom has founded the earth; by understanding has God established the heavens.” (Proverbs 3:5-19)

“There was a poor wise man, and by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. Then said I, Wisdom is better than strength: nevertheless, the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard. The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that rules among fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroys much good.” (Ecclesiastes 9:15-18)

Jesus understood the Book of Wisdom, which is why he said: “Judge not, lest you be judged.” He said our “eye” must be “single” in order to see the divine reality that is at hand. In other words, we should avoid egocentric delusion by not indulging in the “forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” It is what causes people to judge others wrongly and unfairly.

There is now a poor wise man who has shared his Wisdom, but so far not many of us have gotten the message, which he has delivered in writing, and in song.

http://www.soundclick.com/davidjnunson