×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

伊甸园的悖论

本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Int J Phil Re115:171 (1984).
9 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague. Printed in the Netherlands.

THE PARADOX OF EDEN
RICHARD R. La CROIX
State University College at Buffalo

In the book of Genesis we are told that God created Adam and Eve and put them
in the garden of Eden. God also placed in the midst of the garden of Eden the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve were permitted to eat of any of
the trees in the garden of Eden, but God commanded them not to eat the fruit of
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The forbidden fruit was eaten by Adam
and Eve and God punished them for their disobedience (see Genesis 3:16-19).

Notice that there is a difficulty with this story. Before they ate the forbidden
fruit Adam and Eve either knew that obeying God is good and disobeying God is
evil or they did not know this. If they knew it, then Adam and Eve would have already
possessed the knowledge of good and evil and through his omniscience God
would know this and he would also know that Adam and Eve would not very likely
be tempted to eat the forbidden fruit because they would have nothing to gain
by disobeying God. So, since God's command not to eat the fruit of the tree of
the knowledge of good and evil was an inadequate and unfair test of the righteousness
of Adam and Eve if they already possessed the knowledge of good and evil,
God acted unjustly by making this command if they already had this knowledge.

On the other hand, if Adam and Eve did not know that obeying God is good and
disobeying God is evil, then they could not have known that it was wrong or evil
to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So, since God punished
Adam and Eve for doing something that they could not have known to be
wrong or evil, God acted unjustly by punishing them. It would appear to follow
that whether or not Adam and Eve knew that obeying God is good and disobeying
God is evil, God acted unjustly. But, then, God is just at one time and unjust at
another time. Consequently, being just is not a necessary or essential property of
God.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下拾英 / 心灵感悟 / 问个老问题
    伊甸园的蛇是哪来的?
    上帝造的?上帝不全善
    不是上帝造的?上帝不全能
    这个蛇在伊甸园上帝知道不知道?
    知道却不保护亚当夏娃,上帝不全能,或者不全善
    不知道?上帝不全知
    • 上帝不是不知道,也不是不善,更不是不全能。上帝要告诉你生活的真谛,再美好的东西也有丑陋的部分。Deal with it.
      • “上帝要告诉你生活的真谛,再美好的东西也有丑陋的部分”--- 你自己引申出的东西,就别拿来说教了。Irrelevant.
        • 那你找个亲自跟上帝对过话的人去问吧。
    • 蛇是上帝雇的(造的?)QA,用来做产品检验,检验结果:不合格。
      • 即使是象你说的,这也没否认‘产品’不能改造啊(瞎说)。
        • 我也没说上帝否认啥了哈:)我看这是一位Frustrated上帝:第一次改造:罚,逐出伊甸园,地里刨食,人仍旧作恶,亚夏的儿子就互相残杀;第二次改造:杀,就留诺亚一家,义人的后代总是义人了吧?结果人类还是作恶;第三次改造:离间,就选以色列人做选民,许诺他们统治世界
          结果摩西的石板协议还没捂热乎(如果当时有笔墨的话一定墨迹未干),以色列人就开始在异教神像前载歌载舞;最后了,上帝豁出去了,派自己的儿子下来流血牺牲,叫人们归顺他,还提醒人们:进我的门很窄。几乎2000年过去了,愿意进他的门得永生的人类,却越来越少。

          上帝一定很郁闷。
          • 这是不是隐喻了人类历史的真实呢?那也不能否认最后的的拯救啊,看圣经‘葡萄园主’的比喻。
            • 进窄门的说法颇有点广告词意味吸引眼球,那么给晚来的工人一样的工钱,则是招不到人手的无可奈何之计了,是不是?
              • 请看马可福音12章【12:1-12】
                • 害我找经。。。以为你说的是马太福音20章1-16。。。是的佃户的比喻里小儿子死掉了,园户们我看至今活得好好的(犹太教,或者反基督教势力统称),而外人,未必会接手这个麻烦的葡萄园。实际情况是,由于基督徒所见的坏人不除,葡萄园已衰微,好久不产葡萄了:(
                  • 你误解了。、、、、,且葡萄树接上了新枝。
    • 伊甸园的悖论
      本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Int J Phil Re115:171 (1984).
      9 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague. Printed in the Netherlands.

      THE PARADOX OF EDEN
      RICHARD R. La CROIX
      State University College at Buffalo

      In the book of Genesis we are told that God created Adam and Eve and put them
      in the garden of Eden. God also placed in the midst of the garden of Eden the tree
      of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve were permitted to eat of any of
      the trees in the garden of Eden, but God commanded them not to eat the fruit of
      the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The forbidden fruit was eaten by Adam
      and Eve and God punished them for their disobedience (see Genesis 3:16-19).

      Notice that there is a difficulty with this story. Before they ate the forbidden
      fruit Adam and Eve either knew that obeying God is good and disobeying God is
      evil or they did not know this. If they knew it, then Adam and Eve would have already
      possessed the knowledge of good and evil and through his omniscience God
      would know this and he would also know that Adam and Eve would not very likely
      be tempted to eat the forbidden fruit because they would have nothing to gain
      by disobeying God. So, since God's command not to eat the fruit of the tree of
      the knowledge of good and evil was an inadequate and unfair test of the righteousness
      of Adam and Eve if they already possessed the knowledge of good and evil,
      God acted unjustly by making this command if they already had this knowledge.

      On the other hand, if Adam and Eve did not know that obeying God is good and
      disobeying God is evil, then they could not have known that it was wrong or evil
      to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So, since God punished
      Adam and Eve for doing something that they could not have known to be
      wrong or evil, God acted unjustly by punishing them. It would appear to follow
      that whether or not Adam and Eve knew that obeying God is good and disobeying
      God is evil, God acted unjustly. But, then, God is just at one time and unjust at
      another time. Consequently, being just is not a necessary or essential property of
      God.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
      • 玩悖论陷阱之一就是把命题绝对化,变成计算机的0/1逻辑:1>Adam如果知善恶then;2>Adam不知善恶then...推导出悖论。难道不会是亚夏在吃智慧果汁前知道“部分”善恶,即obeying God是善disobeying是恶,不行吗?而且上帝已经告诉他们吃了的后果:会死。
        他们吃了以后,则“更加”知善恶“了,比如知道赤身裸体为丑等等,并且有了学习能力,进一步,如果上帝不介入,就会研究了解,找到并吃生命树的果子。
        所以说知识不是完全有或者完全无的东西,只有多少的区别。而上帝惩罚的,不是他们知道了更多知识(知道赤身裸体为丑),而是对上帝的disobey。。。
        这样大概可以圆还说通了。