What I read God is speaking in parables, that is why Bible believers cannot agree on their interpretation. Hence, the division of CHRISTIANITY into many sects and denominations.
This "tree of knowledge of good and evil" the cause of MAN'S downfall must have "spiritual meaning". At youtube, this is discussed. Click:
By taking of the fruit of “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad,” Adam and Eve expressed their rebellion.
The Creator, as Universal Sovereign, was acting wholly within his right in making the law regarding the tree, for Adam, being a created person, and not sovereign, had limitations, and he needed to acknowledge this fact. For universal peace and harmony, it would devolve upon all reasoning creatures to acknowledge and support the Creator’s sovereignty. Adam would demonstrate his recognition of this fact by refraining from eating the fruit of that tree. As father-to-be of an earth full of people, he must prove obedient and loyal, even in the smallest thing. The principle involved was: “The person faithful in what is least is faithful also in much, and the person unrighteous in what is least is unrighteous also in much.” (Lu 16:10) Adam had the capability for such perfect obedience. There was evidently nothing bad intrinsically in the fruit of the tree itself. (The thing forbidden was not sex relations, for God had commanded the pair to “fill the earth.” [Ge 1:28] It was the fruit of an actual tree, as the Bible says.) What was represented by the tree is well expressed in a footnote on Genesis 2:17, in The Jerusalem Bible (1966):
“This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on God’s sovereignty, a sin of pride.”
God’s servants charged with selfishness. A further expression of the issue is found in Satan’s statement to God about his faithful servant Job. Satan said: “Is it for nothing that Job has feared God? Have not you yourself put up a hedge about him and about his house and about everything that he has all around? The work of his hands you have blessed, and his livestock itself has spread abroad in the earth. But, for a change, thrust out your hand, please, and touch everything he has and see whether he will not curse you to your very face.” Again, he charged: “Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul.” (Job 1:9-11; 2:4) Satan therewith charged Job with being not in harmony with God at heart, as serving God obediently only because of selfish considerations, for gain. Satan thereby slandered God as to his sovereignty, and God’s servants as to integrity to that sovereignty. He said, in effect, that no man could be put on earth who would maintain integrity to Jehovah’s sovereignty if he, Satan, was allowed to put him to the test.
Jehovah permitted the issue to be joined. Not, however, because he was unsure of the righteousness of his own sovereignty. He needed nothing proved to himself. It was out of love for his intelligent creatures that he allowed time for the testing out of the matter. He permitted men to undergo a test by Satan, before all the universe. And he gave his creatures the privilege of proving the Devil a liar, and of removing the slander not only from God’s name but also from their own. Satan, in his egotistic attitude, was ‘given up to a disapproved mental state.’ In his approach to Eve, he had evidently been contradictory in his own reasoning. (Ro 1:28) For he was charging God with unfair, unrighteous exercise of sovereignty and, at the same time, was evidently counting on God’s fairness: He seemed to think that God would consider Himself obliged to let him live on if he proved his charge concerning the unfaithfulness of God’s creatures.
Answers & Comments
What I read God is speaking in parables, that is why Bible believers cannot agree on their interpretation. Hence, the division of CHRISTIANITY into many sects and denominations.
This "tree of knowledge of good and evil" the cause of MAN'S downfall must have "spiritual meaning". At youtube, this is discussed. Click:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgU9gqKVjjg
It was simply knowledge. But with knowledge comes the awareness of good and evil, otherwise you simple walk around like an idiot and nod your head.
the "eating teh fruit" part of Adam and Eve is probably metaphor for the explanaition of "original sin"
Its something some dude made up 1000s of years ago because he had no understanding of the world
By taking of the fruit of “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad,” Adam and Eve expressed their rebellion.
The Creator, as Universal Sovereign, was acting wholly within his right in making the law regarding the tree, for Adam, being a created person, and not sovereign, had limitations, and he needed to acknowledge this fact. For universal peace and harmony, it would devolve upon all reasoning creatures to acknowledge and support the Creator’s sovereignty. Adam would demonstrate his recognition of this fact by refraining from eating the fruit of that tree. As father-to-be of an earth full of people, he must prove obedient and loyal, even in the smallest thing. The principle involved was: “The person faithful in what is least is faithful also in much, and the person unrighteous in what is least is unrighteous also in much.” (Lu 16:10) Adam had the capability for such perfect obedience. There was evidently nothing bad intrinsically in the fruit of the tree itself. (The thing forbidden was not sex relations, for God had commanded the pair to “fill the earth.” [Ge 1:28] It was the fruit of an actual tree, as the Bible says.) What was represented by the tree is well expressed in a footnote on Genesis 2:17, in The Jerusalem Bible (1966):
“This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on God’s sovereignty, a sin of pride.”
God’s servants charged with selfishness. A further expression of the issue is found in Satan’s statement to God about his faithful servant Job. Satan said: “Is it for nothing that Job has feared God? Have not you yourself put up a hedge about him and about his house and about everything that he has all around? The work of his hands you have blessed, and his livestock itself has spread abroad in the earth. But, for a change, thrust out your hand, please, and touch everything he has and see whether he will not curse you to your very face.” Again, he charged: “Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul.” (Job 1:9-11; 2:4) Satan therewith charged Job with being not in harmony with God at heart, as serving God obediently only because of selfish considerations, for gain. Satan thereby slandered God as to his sovereignty, and God’s servants as to integrity to that sovereignty. He said, in effect, that no man could be put on earth who would maintain integrity to Jehovah’s sovereignty if he, Satan, was allowed to put him to the test.
Jehovah permitted the issue to be joined. Not, however, because he was unsure of the righteousness of his own sovereignty. He needed nothing proved to himself. It was out of love for his intelligent creatures that he allowed time for the testing out of the matter. He permitted men to undergo a test by Satan, before all the universe. And he gave his creatures the privilege of proving the Devil a liar, and of removing the slander not only from God’s name but also from their own. Satan, in his egotistic attitude, was ‘given up to a disapproved mental state.’ In his approach to Eve, he had evidently been contradictory in his own reasoning. (Ro 1:28) For he was charging God with unfair, unrighteous exercise of sovereignty and, at the same time, was evidently counting on God’s fairness: He seemed to think that God would consider Himself obliged to let him live on if he proved his charge concerning the unfaithfulness of God’s creatures.
Your question answers itself.