Quote:
Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!
Wasn't the result of that eating bad as God had said, that is --> death?
I see the knowledge of good and evil tree as allowing man to take control of matters for his own purposes. That is, man could independently decide for himself whether he should pursue something or not, rather than seeking the Lord and following His choices - as Jesus demonstrated in His actions that He sought His Father's will and did not act in His independent knowledge of things.
I think it comes down to what the source of the knowledge is.
|
Knucklehead Who Won't Read Scriptur-----I mean,
Sons to Glory,
The result of their
sin was death. The result of their
disobedience, the
offense, the
transgression was death.
The wages (what we are due, what we are paid, what we EARN) of
sin ("the offense") is death. Not "the wages of what we eat is death".
It couldn't be more explicit in Genesis where death came from. From their being cut off from the tree of life. There is no verse, no record, no statement that says death came from what they ate. None. There is an explicit verse that says they were cut off from the tree of life SO THEY WOULD NO LONGER LIVE FOREVER -- i.e DIE.
As to what the result of eating is, it is in Genesis 3:22:
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
When God named the trees, He didn't name them deceptively. If you eat the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you get -- the knowledge of good and evil! And this very verse shows us that: "the man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil", just like God said.
If it was the tree of "allowing man to take control of matters for his own purposes", then God would have called it that.
I'm not going to keep saying the same thing over and over again. I've written plenty on this topic and have no intention of banging my head against a wall that won't put eyes on the verses. I'm showing you verses, scripture, explicit references, explicit words, and you keep responding with things Witness Lee taught that have no basis in scripture. Other posters have grasped the concepts right away, so I know the issue is not the way I'm explaining things.
Trapped
P.S. this is going to sound frustrated, and it is a little bit, but can you tell me - in all the discussion about this topic, have you gone back and actually re-read Genesis 2-3? Or are you simply speaking from what you know of the story? If the latter, I would ask you to go back and read Genesis 2-3, with the intention of actually looking for proof of what Lee taught (which is what you seem to still espouse).