Yes, we assume so many false things. Have your cake and eat it too.
It is certainly not me. So we are left with my brother and father. Unfortunately, we cannot deduce more since no more information is provided. Anyhow, there is no relation between this example and the story, so I don’t understand what your point is.
So please tell me what the relation is.
I provide my analysis, and I am wondering if it is wrong.
My idea was that if God is not person, then God cannot be responsible for original sin.
Yes, the whole point is going over each analysis on the raised points.
If God is not responsible for original sin, then maybe the allegorical tale was for giving us the divine message from the story? That is just my opinion.
Why not? We have four characters here, so one of them must be responsible for the first sin. Don’t you agree?
As I kept suggesting, normativity is that you don’t blame or impose responsibility to nonhuman entities like God or devil for sins of humans.
Only humans are responsible for their sins or wrong doings.
But humans in the story could not be held responsible for the first sin since they were fooled by the Serpent.
This is the point. That is why I was saying the story is to pass on the messages from God, rather than about sin.
The possible divine messages are,
Ignorance is also sin. Read and learn make yourself knowledgeable to survive in the real world.
God doesn’t love humans.
God will hide himself away from humans.
Ignorance is not a sin; it is bad.
Probably! But I am interested in understanding who is responsible for the first sin.
That is your personal opinion.
I accept you are. But I feel it seems not possible to conclude who is responsible for the first sin due to the circumstances (lack of exact material evidence) and also the nature of the characters involved in the story i.e. God, devil and humans.
I am not sure, if God in OT spoke directly to humans. I was under impression, it was always either the prophets or author of OT spoke on behalf of God.
If that is the case, then we cannot be certain, if God’s words were the actual words he spoke or not. There might have been misinterpretations in their communications too.
Only in so far as what they want to do does not require knowledge. Chapter 4 opens with Adam knowing Eve and producing offspring.
Eve desired the fruit of the tree of knowledge because she desired wisdom. (3.6) Aristotle’s Metaphysics begins by saying that all men by nature desire to know.
Is God responsible for her following her desires? God does not give man this desire, he warns them off but does not prevent Adam and Eve from gaining knowledge. He does not treat them like pets lacking independence and choices.
What is the connection between her desire to be wise by eating of the tree of knowledge and her desire for her husband (3.16)? In both cases the consequences are both good and bad.
But God punished the Serpent and humans. God was right or wrong! Take your pick.
So, you agree that God created man with the desire to know and then punish him because he tried to know!?
God is above right or wrong. Humans don’t have right to judge God.
Just take your pick!
…and yet they must.
Another problem here is that definition of sin. Sin is defined as “offence against God” in the Bible.
If God is responsible for original sin, how can God be responsible for offence against God himself?
Can you offend yourself, and be responsible for the offence you caused to yourself?
They will say, by definition of God, God is above judgement.
I will answer that after you take your pick!
…and in so doing they judge god.
I am open minded on all the issues until the conclusion emerges after the full discussion.
I don’t have enough data to take pick at the stage. We need more findings on the issue by asking questions and inspecting the answers before coming to any conclusion.