The Genesis Paradox

a reply to: Willtell

Teaching a kid not to cross a street without looking both ways is an example of teaching cause and effect. If you walk before looking, you can get hit by a car. But the act of looking or not looking is neither good nor evil. It is just good advice to live by. The difference here being that there is no visible cause and effect to compare to with the apple. No one had eaten the apple before, so there was no previous information to compare with on what will or won't happen. Another difference is that eating of the apple IS akin to evil as well.

The Term “ Man will be like us knowing good and evil” refers to the fact that with the Fall of Man humans would experience or taste ( Karma) the results of his actions) because his inner facilities will be so distorted ( what Buddha refers to as Life and death cycle) would be enhanced…the life and death cycle of not only the physical body but also the inner thinking cycle of thought would be so corrupt it would render man spiritually blind.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Ok. Then explain the two seperate bloodlines from the same mother Eve. Who screwed with her to get her pregnant with cain? Cains bloodline eventually begat the Muslim bloodline supossedly. ANd the next son after abel started the bloodline for Eventually jesus.

There is no such thing as a Muslim bloodline.

Every race is Muslim that chooses to be Muslim and takes Shahada.

You can't turn a religion into a bloodline because race is not a choice, religion is.

Is there a Christian bloodline? No. Anyone can join.

a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Cain's line was destroyed. Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth plus their wives were from Seth. And the only flood survivors.

Which explains the garden story perfectly. And actually the whole Cain and Abel story as well. As a child I always was so confused as to why God favored Abel so much. It never made sense.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Willtell

Teaching a kid not to cross a street without looking both ways is an example of teaching cause and effect. If you walk before looking, you can get hit by a car. But the act of looking or not looking is neither good nor evil. It is just good advice to live by. The difference here being that there is no visible cause and effect to compare to with the apple. No one had eaten the apple before, so there was no previous information to compare with on what will or won't happen. Another difference is that eating of the apple IS akin to evil as well.

But my contention is that the apple was already eaten by adepts who were more advanced than Adam.

Mt contention is that the prohibition was NOT a universal one.

It could be likened to the analogy of prohibiting toddlers from playing in the street but when their teenagers that is no longer applicable


The harm don’t to Adam had to have something to do with his immaturity( present state of development) since it would produce such a cataclysmic affect in our deep fall into historical evil.

God or the guidance, Angels, or whoever who were prohibiting this tree form Adam had to have known about the Tree or they wouldn't be able to warn him of the affect of him eating thereof.

originally posted by: KingPhilipsiX

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Ok. Then explain the two seperate bloodlines from the same mother Eve. Who screwed with her to get her pregnant with cain? Cains bloodline eventually begat the Muslim bloodline supossedly. ANd the next son after abel started the bloodline for Eventually jesus.

There is no such thing as a Muslim bloodline.

Every race is Muslim that chooses to be Muslim and takes Shahada.

You can't turn a religion into a bloodline because race is not a choice, religion is.

Is there a Christian bloodline? No. Anyone can join.

OH sorry I meant ARABS. I forgot "muslims" are not a bloodline.. Thanks for pointing that out. Point was Cain eventually begat Muhammeds line and the other bagat jesus's bloodline.

Also there Arent seperate races. Biologically speaking of course there is just ONE. There are different ethniciies though. "race" as bigots use is a social creation and not actually true.

a reply to: concerned190

It is confusing but Cain was a foreshadowing of Nimrod. Great nation builder.

But I always get the message that this God prefers blood sacrifice over the grain offerings.

Interesting little known fact, Cain also had a son named Enoch. He was murdered by a relative of Lamech in the book of Jasher, and the accidental killer has to be killed because of the promise God made.

Interesting book, I recommend it. Jasher means upright or correct record.

originally posted by: KingPhilipsiX
a reply to: concerned190

It is confusing but Cain was a foreshadowing of Nimrod. Great nation builder.

But I always get the message that this God prefers blood sacrifice over the grain offerings.

Interesting little known fact, Cain also had a son named Enoch. He was murdered by a relative of Lamech in the book of Jasher, and the accidental killer has to be killed because of the promise God made.

Interesting book, I recommend it. Jasher means upright or correct record.

It’s not that God preferred blood sacrifice its that after the Fall of Man this blood lust became mans prominent nature

The “God” here is expressing the human desires

Understand the story is an ALLEGORY


The Fruits were lofty and blissful states of consciousness of tremendous power and awesome potential.

To understand this ALLEGORY correctly, what one has to do is think of all the elements in the story as the insides of one being---YOURSELF!

In other words inside us all is an Adam, an Eve, A Lord, A serpent, a devil…a Garden of Eden…Jesus said “The Kingdom of God is within you”

I don't think the Genesis account was intended to be mulled over to such a degree. And even if it was, very little good can come of it except forcing literalists to jump through mental hurdles to justify various arguments and counter-arguments.

The gist of the story is:

Hey kids, listen to God! Especially when it comes to deciding what is good and what is evil, because God knows best!

This story was written for people who would be likely to form their own opinions about things if some preacher on high didn't expressly forbid it.

If taken literally, I find it very hard to get over the fact that God dropped his newborn, innocent humans into a nursery populated by pure evil. What a great parent... If I did such a thing to my own children, they'd take me to prison.

a reply to: Willtell

The heart of the garden
Holds two splendid trees
One is called Adam
One is called Eve
Oh let the eye listen
Oh let the ear see
The heart of the garden
Inside you and me

a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Socrates called and said you were late for a lesson on "Knowledge"

a reply to: yuppa

The same should be said for the word "Gentiles" as if the world is divided between Jew and not Jew.

It is from the term goyim which can mean cattle. Or just ethos in Greek meaning nations. It is such a subtle but powerful word, as is Semite.

Ishmael's Mother was Hamitic, Father Semitic. All of Africa was Hamitic (Khem was Egypt) but no connection can be made to Cain, sorry, you will have to find another reason to hate them.

But do you really despise so many people you don't know that your mind is actively looking for ways to connect them to evil? And you will go so far as to connect them with Cain? Even though his entire line was destroyed?

That just sounds awful.

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: KingPhilipsiX
a reply to: concerned190

It is confusing but Cain was a foreshadowing of Nimrod. Great nation builder.

But I always get the message that this God prefers blood sacrifice over the grain offerings.

Interesting little known fact, Cain also had a son named Enoch. He was murdered by a relative of Lamech in the book of Jasher, and the accidental killer has to be killed because of the promise God made.

Interesting book, I recommend it. Jasher means upright or correct record.

It’s not that God preferred blood sacrifice its that after the Fall of Man this blood lust became mans prominent nature

The “God” here is expressing the human desires

Nah. I think you're view is naive.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Its confusing because all these Adams apples have been picking cherries twisting it like vines(look those up theyre funny) to make it say what they want it to say... such things today are called memes and theres quite a few religious ones...

Here's one for televangelists:

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Socrates called and said you were late for a lesson on "Knowledge"

Oh. Am I supposed to find that humorous or insulting? I need to know so I can pretend to be either and you can feel better about yourself at my expense because that is how little I care about what people think if they can't say what they mean without trying (and failing) to be clever and other less polite adjectives.

originally posted by: Willtell
Understand the story is an ALLEGORY


The Fruits were lofty and blissful states of consciousness of tremendous power and awesome potential.

To understand this ALLEGORY correctly, what one has to do is think of all the elements in the story as the insides of one being---YOURSELF!

In other words inside us all is an Adam, an Eve, A Lord, A serpent, a devil…a Garden of Eden…Jesus said “The Kingdom of God is within you”

It doesn't work explaining that to people because it involves too much thinking.

If they want to know, they know. If they want to believe it is history you will never convince them otherwise. It is phenomenal.

a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

You can not eat from the tree of knowledge AND the tree of life. This is a way for the Priests to say that knowledge leads to evil and death, but if you refrain you can have eternal life. Everyone says that Jews only believed in a gloomy state of darkness after death (Sheol) regardless of good or evil . I seriously doubt that this was what they believed because a few people were taken bodily to heaven, there was a heaven.

You are correct that Adam and Eve could not eat of both trees in the garden. The tree of life was taken away when the garden was taken away. The garden of Eden is the earthly paradise and was removed only to be reinstated as the Celestial New Jerusalem. The New Jerusalem is first revealed by Isaiah and then by the Apostle John as the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus never revealed the location of His kingdom of heaven while alive but did reveal it as the New Jerusalem to His Apostle John in His revelations in the book of Revelation. Within this New Jerusalem or paradise is that tree of life which was taken away and is given back to those who have resurrected new celestial bodies. It is the celestial food for the celestial body. So in that respect the righteous do eat of both trees.

Prior to advent of Jesus there was a separation of spirits in Sheol but after His death and removing the righteous from Sheol there now contains only the unrighteous in Sheol.

As Jesus was alive He plainly stated that ----

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Through misinterpretation most people assume that both Elijah and Enoch ascended into heaven but that is an assumption based upon their own understanding. Being translated means the change of substance and to have either resurrection or translation one must die. Prior to the death of Jesus both Elijah and Enoch were contained in Sheol. After Jesus' death both were taken to the kingdom of heaven.

a reply to: KingPhilipsiX

Taking it how you want is called free will...

So how did you take it? Sounds like youre waiting to see if I cross some line youve drawn when I was suggstion hey if you want to erase that line take a look over there...

You starting defining knowledge... and as Socrates taught among others before and after... even myself earlier in the thread ahem explained theres no such thing except a held belief not everyone shares... so knowledge is esentially empty doesnt exist.

Just because it seems to change something speaking knowledge or label label label? It doesnt change anything except maybe others grasping after that which doesnt inherently exist and when it does change by some reaction a new label label label or entropy...

This "knowledge" is just perpetuated for a quazi reality we sorta share beyond this matter or form already present when we got here... in a form not really different containing all the same things found in it in various amounts...

All those thinking this nothing was something started naming it... even though thats not what it is or ever will be just a representation of cause and effect that occurs whether consciousness of it exists or not.

Aware of it but not conscious of it in thought... it simply is what it is. The I am what I am is the separation from it... why chase ego when one already has it? Drop that and the subject is of no matter.

I John 3:12 "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his (half) brother.." Here the word "of" in Greek is #1537 in the Strong's Concordance. When used implying a person, it means "a son of or offspring."

Compare this with other translations:

The New Testament in Modern English: "We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was a son of the devil.."

Living Bible: "We are not to be like Cain, who belonged to Satan.."

New English Bible: "..unlike Cain who was a child of the evil one.."

New Century Bible: "Do not be like Cain who belonged to the Evil One."

New Jerusalem Bible: "..not to be like Cain, who was from the Evil One.."

And the popular commentaries confirm the same thing:

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary page 1473: "He (Cain) is said to have belonged to the family of the wicked one."

Matthew Poole's Commentary on the Holy Bible, volume 3, page 936. "Which showed him (Cain) to be of that wicked one, of the serpent's seed: so early was such seed sown, and so ancient the enmity between seed and seed."

Matthew Henry's Commentary, volume 6 page 1077: "It showed that he (Cain) was as the firstborn of the serpent's seed.."