A Game For Good Christians

View Original

The Forbidden Fruit (Genesis 3)

Note: the Card Talk/rant to follow is a result of being re-exposed to arguments asking the question “why did God place the tree there is the first place?" and simply answering, "Oh, God just wanted humanity to fall!”


For the love of God (no really, for the love of God), the tree is not the point: it is not magical.

The fruit is also not the point: it too is not magical.

Humanity’s actions are the point.

We’re tired of the Luciferian arguments from the lips of "good christians," saying God set the tree and the fruit in the midst of the garden as a test, a trick, or a trap for humanity. The idea that the serpent was right: that God was trying to keep goodness, knowledge, and/or power from humanity. Thus the serpent is raised to the heights of being a biblical Prometheus. And yes we said Luciferican, as in the belief system/religion named after Lucifer (No, we're not saying there is anything wrong with being a Luciferian, or having Luciferian beliefs, unless you call yourself a Christian. Then it might be a problem). 

All of this misses that the tree and the fruit are not the point. Why?

Because no matter what God said, humanity had the option to not do it.

Read that again. Now again.


It's All in the Story

Remove the tree from the story, remove the fruit, and see what happens. Walk through Genesis chapter 2 with us and see the options that humanity had at any moment to anything and everything God said:

“Man, work and take care of this wonderful paradise I’ve made for you.” (Gen 2:15)

You made a world now you want me to take care of it? Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit: I ain’t your slave. Take care of it your holy self.

“Man, freely eat from any tree in the garden I’ve made for you” (Gen 2:16)

I ain’t no hippy, vegan! I want BBQ!

“Man, I have formed all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky out of the ground: you may name each living creature whatever your heart desires.” (Gen 2:19-20)

What did I tell you about giving me busy work? Ain’t nobody got time for that.

“Man, this if your Woman. Woman, this is your man. Love each other well and teach your descendants to do the same.” (Gen 2:21-25)
See this gallery in the original post

What?! No! Where are those sheep at?

Do you see the point?

The very act of God giving us anything means that we can reject it. They (we) have the option of not loving: of hating, envying, coveting someone else’s stuff, lying about each other, stealing from each other, killing each other.

The tree, the fruit, doesn’t matter. What matters is what we do.

Why is it called The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? Because they learned what evil was when they ate from it. The Hebrew word for “Knowledge” stems from the root יָדַע {yada}, which is the same work for "sex." In other words experiential knowledge: Adam didn’t just know his wife, he knew her, and their children were conceived. (Gen 4:1)

The First Couple knew evil once they ate the fruit from the tree, when they had done what they weren’t supposed to, acting against God. They experienced evil as it entered into the world. They could now compare it to what they already had experienced, and knew: goodness, saying “yes” to God, acting in the way He asked. They knew good and evil because they experienced both.

God never intended for people to sin, “Fall,” or commit evil. God wanted people to love, simply by doing what He asked. Again remove the fruit: we could still have our own way, not do what God wants, and discovered evil.

Given a choice, we can always choose wrong. But we can also choose right.

Perhaps that’s the point: the ability to choose.

Perhaps we need to remember that a central part of the story is free will.

Perhaps we need to remember that free will is the only way we can love.

Perhaps, for the love of God, we need to love.

 

But what do we know: we made this game and you probably think we’re going to Hell.

See this form in the original post


* Note: This Card Talk does reject the notion that the Hebrew phrase “good and evil” is a merism for “all knowledge.” We are aware of that interpretation, but side with the scholars that dismiss it on numerous grounds, including the above.