It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Eve have sex with Lucifer in the Garden of Eden?

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: spy66



Originally posted by spy66
A snake does not eat dust. Maybe a Worm would. But a Worm is not a snake or a serpent.


The “eat dust” part is symbolic of living in death. This is also why the snake symbol was chosen, because it crawls on the ground and lives near to Sheol or the grave…

But the snake can also stand/coil upwards i.e. gets lifted up, symbolically towards heaven. This is reflected in the Story of Moses and the “bronze serpent”, where it gets lifted up on a pole to heal the people…


- JC




Yes it could be as you state. But i personally think "serpent and snake" are more linked to that the beast was more subtil then any other of the beasts. This beast is a trixster and a lier, and very intelligent. This beast was more developed and way more intelligent then Adam and the woman.

And you can ask Yourself. Why would Lord God create such a beast? If Adam and the woman was to be above all beasts.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: DeathSlayer



Originally posted by DeathSlayer
So is it possible that Lucifer had sex with Eve? There were no laws at this time. Maybe all three had sex?

It makes more sense as to how the serpents offspring walk this planet.

Is it possible that there are people who are on this planet right now who are direct descendants of Cain through the blood of Noah or one of his son-in-laws? Who is a direct blood relative of Cain.



When the verse states “between your offspring and hers”…it doesn’t specifically state that there’s any union taking place between the woman and the snake…

Although it can look that way, the first time around from reading it.

It could just as easily mean the Woman's offspring (with Adam) and the snakes offspring (with other snakes), will be at enmity with each other…i.e. snakes will forever be at enmity with Man and Woman…

Which makes a lot more sense, than literal snakes mixing with humans etc…


- JC



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: InachMarbank
a reply to: CulturalResilience

Hypergamy: the action of marrying a person of a superior class or caste.

Is that what Eve was trying to do with a son of God?

Or did Eve get raped?

Seems like that is a debate going on here...


I will say that if we accept that Eve was a woman then we must conclude that female Hypergamy played its part in whatever took place. Woman have never, and do not ever, transcend their inherent nature.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI



Originally posted by DISRAELI
I am drawing the line by looking for the interpretation that makes the most sense, and leaves the whole thing least tangled.
The basic story of the temptation is an aetiological, or "origin", story, explaining the origin of death and everything else that is wrong with the world. A metaphorical snake is introduced for the purpose. Once there's a "snake" element in the story, the writer takes the opportunity of attaching to it an observation about literal snakes in their relationship with men and including that in the explanations.



I personally think the chapter uses literal attributes of a snake, which is why it’s said to bite the heels of men/woman and why it gets it’s head crushed by men and woman etc…

But using literal attributes of a snake, does not mean that the serpent spoken to in Genesis 3:14 is a literal snake entity…if that makes sense…

So bearing the above in mind; when you say the snake bruising business is literal…in which way do you mean it…Literal snake attributes, or a real literal snake being addressed in Genesis 3:14…?


- JC



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecroft
So bearing the above in mind; when you say the snake bruising business is literal…in which way do you mean it…

I still think, as I said a couple of pages back, that the comment is based on the observed behaviours of literal snakes and literal humans. In putting the story together, the observation has been tacked on to a narrative involving a metaphorical serpent.
Which is what I said in my last post.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Awesome


I love Mythology

Yeah Lucifer Banged Lilith too .

what a Crazy Angel he was!


not much into a fictitious book ,

sadly people that dont believe in aliens
Extra terrestrials..

yet they Believe this Bible

as too me its a whole lotta Aliens and UFOS and Monsters
within it ,


Enoch going into a Spaceship and what he saw as described by him,

Ezekiel's Visions !

Moses
guiding pillars of light and moving dark clouds in the exodus
the mana machine , light beings aka Angels or Reptilian snaky Beings

LOL

some random stuff in question


Didnt Noah banged his Granddaughters and knock them up ?
when Drunk ?


Didnt Abraham became Delusional and close to killing his Autistic Son !
from hearing voices! and made a religion out of it ! let alone his father made worship idols in his shop of
Sumerian Gods in UR wouldn't Abraham consider being a Sumerian ?

Didnt Job lost everything from God and god granted all of his stuff back
except the resurrection of his children and wife , Job had to procreated more.

didnt God commit causing adultery on a virgin ! Impregnating her and did a manutu type crap
and Would Joseph a Cuckold? . or did Mary made a Religion out of it to cover it up , just to cover up her adultery
of Some European Roman Soldier ?

all from some Hebrew writings adapted from Egyptian's, Hittites, and Sumerian legends

Got to love Mythology.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI



Originally posted by DISRAELI
I still think, as I said a couple of pages back, that the comment is based on the observed behaviours of literal snakes and literal humans. In putting the story together, the observation has been tacked on to a narrative involving a metaphorical serpent.

Which is what I said in my last post.


But the answer of “observed behaviours of literal snakes etc.”…doesn’t fully cover my question…

Let’s try to make this a bit easier…

Do you believe that Genesis 3:14 is referring to a literal Serpent/Snake...?

You stated in another post that you see the “bruising business” as literal…that’s what I’m trying to get clarity on…

You see, there are two ways in which the “bruising business” can be seen as literal…

For example…

(1) The literal attributes/behaviours of a snake are used, to help explain that part of the story; with the added caveat, that the snake/serpent isn't literally real…

Or

(2) The snake is not only used for it's literal behaviours and attributes, but actually exists for real within the story…i.e. the serpent/snake is a real entity…


Which one do you believe in…?


- JC



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecroft
I take "you have done this" as being about what the metaphorical entity has done.
I take "you will do this" as addressed to the literal physical species of snakes.
(Obviously the writer who puts them into the same sentence isn't subjecting it to careful philosophical analysis)

That is probably closer to your first option than your second.

That really will have to do. If you ask me again, I will just paste a link to my "posts in thread" and leave it at that. There is nothing more I can give you.




edit on 2-4-2017 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DeathSlayer

Or all that crap is a fairy tale and none of it is real...



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: DeathSlayer

This is part of Cain is the father of humanity theory
supposedly buried under a mountain

that the majority is from Cain's line



Cain made love to his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

19 Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah. 20 Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. 21 His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play stringed instruments and pipes. 22 Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of[g] bronze and iron. Tubal-Cain’s sister was Naamah.




"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers

between your offspring and her offspring
different
descendants etc.



Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. 4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast


Cain offers fruit



He causes the grass to grow for the cattle, And vegetation for the labor of man, So that he may bring forth food from the earth,




"Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food";


Abel offered living creature
blood

Why would God who says plants are your food
and food for the creatures too
favour an offering of meat over it ?



'For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.'



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: DeathSlayer
There is no suggestion in the text that the serpent's children are children by Eve. Why are you dragging sex into that relationship, anyway? You're not a Moonie, are you? Because "Eve committed adultery with Satan" is Moonie teaching. It's on p79 of my copy of Divine Principle (don't ask me how I acquired that copy. It's a long story).

As I said, the verse I quoted is a very literal account of the relationship betwen the snake and the human species. I think we ought to take its meaning from that.


And the fact that the snake talked to Eve.
How do we get around that one?

I have seen plenty of snakes and not one of them has ever talked to me.

To me, the "knowledge" the Eve gained and passed on to the Adam was that they were both naked. Nakedness represented subservience...which they had to God [YWHW]...therefore they gained knowledge of their subservience and their nakedness, thus becoming aware and of no further use to the war god. So, out they went, beyond the walled garden of Eden and into the big, bad world with all the others who were already out there.

Just my take on it.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: fromtheskydown
And the fact that the snake talked to Eve.
How do we get around that one?

As you read further down the thread, you will have seen me make other replies, including the suggestion of "splitting" the interpretation, between a metaphorical serpent that tempts Eve, and a literal snake species that bites the heels of human individuals.
You may even come across this explanation, which I have had to post more than once;

The basic story of the temptation is an aetiological, or "origin", story, explaining the origin of death and everything else that is wrong with the world. A metaphorical snake is introduced for the purpose. Once there's a "snake" element in the story, the writer takes the opportunity of attaching to it an observation about literal snakes in their relationship with men and including that in the explanations.





edit on 2-4-2017 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

In my opinion, the Adam and the Eve in the garden of Eden were the second creation, by the god YWHW, and not the Male and Female created in the earlier Genesis accounts.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Fret Or Not...

Lucifer IS NOT the serpent.
In the garden... He is merely a testimony of wise conceit. Which in irony... Is... Like God.

The serpent... Marveled at wisdom and found it mesmerizing. He was endowed. No wisdom given to him was more astounding in beauty that the law of silence. This was his treasure. But... It is only a serpent.
Onward... We all at one time or another as men... (Excuse me WindWord)... Venture in our foolishness filled with wise conceit as if we are knowers of every thing. Then along comes the women who strikes us with awe and reverence. A beauty of the flesh... So astounding and Divine... That we alone ache for the knowledge that is her. It becomes a sickness. Sexuality... Perverness... Longing. That is what happened to the serpent. But... She was clueless. Not knowing man. And not knowing that she was in fact.... The most marvelous of God's wisdom and creation.
Onward: have you ever see a woman you desired who desired you not. Belonged to another. Made for another. The serpent. He longed to be her charm. So... He decided a fair plan. To open her eyes, As a gift that she may see him as a ....


Sorry Ol'Pal. I finish up later.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecroft

if the focus of the matter is the snake, then I would hope the *author would be more accurate with the matter of diet in the metaphor.
if the focus is the meaning of the dust, there are hundreds of creatures that eat dust...not among then, snakes...that could have been coupled better for a legit message.
if it's the condition of a snake eating dust, neither subject is presented [in a relative situation] with enough supporting background relevant to the total metaphor. it falls flat.

/opens a paper bag and throws out some quotation marks and italics...Poof!


eta: *the original scriptural author...not the author of any recent comment.
edit on 2-4-2017 by PolyCottonBlend because: to avoid a hit and run



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: fromtheskydown
a reply to: spy66

In my opinion, the Adam and the Eve in the garden of Eden were the second creation, by the god YWHW, and not the Male and Female created in the earlier Genesis accounts.


I agree With you. In genesis Chapter one God made man as male and female.

In genesis Chapter 1. "male and female" are the last living Things God creates.

There was no mention of a beast that was more subtle then anyother beasts.

This Lord God caracter is the serpent and the beast.... Adam never had to give a name. Lord God is the imposter God within Our religion.


Lord God created a isolated invornment (Garden of Eden) so that he could fool Adam and the woman. And man has lived With false religion and guilt ever since.



edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   

a response to CulturalResilience
I will say that if we accept that Eve was a woman then we must conclude that female Hypergamy played its part in whatever took place. Woman have never, and do not ever, transcend their inherent nature.


I find this statement disappointing to say the least.

The story of what happened in Genesis has been used to cast doubt on women's sense of judgement for too long.The agenda behind that is questionable, though I feel it is rooted primarily in ignorance.

Many often perceive the "serpent" playing a simple trick on Eve, when it could have been so much more.Imo, we often do a disservice to ourselves to imagine Adam and Eve being simple minded in their relationship with God.There are differences in the way each one of us perceives their relationship with God, and the qualities of male and females play into that.Idk, if Eve realized this until after eating the fruit.Their awareness changed, and they saw themselves differently...



Genesis 3@www.biblegateway.com...

7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.

9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

It's easy to get the impression that Adam was passing the buck, in response to Lord God's questioning.I'm not a fan of semantics, but perhaps the fear Adam felt was his conscious nagging him about missing the mark with the commandment about the tree.


13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Eve's response strikes me as much more honest.The questions posed to each of them give me pause to consider too, that Lord God viewed each of their role in what happened to varying degrees of responsibility.

Man has blamed women for too long, selling them short isn't doing us any favours.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: dffrntkndfnml


Lord God never commaned the woman not to eat from the tree of knowedge of good and evil. The woman was not even formed from Adams Rib when Lord God gave the commandment to Adam. Lord God didnt even know that he was going to create woman until much later. Adam was given the Law not the woman.



The woman was also not cast out of the Garden of Eden. Only Adam was cast out. Because he was the one who broke the Law. And only Adam was formed from the Dust on the ground. Eve was not. Eve was not taken from Earth, nor made from it.

It is specifically mentioned in verse 23 who is being cast out.


23
Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.



Eve (The woman) is the tree of life. Adam said that the woman was the mother of all life. That is mentioned in verse 20

And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

But According to genesis Chapter 2 and 3 we know that eve is not the mother of all living. She was formed last in the Garden of Eden. So she must be the tree of life that was Placed in the Garden. Eve was formed and placed in the Garden.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Thanks for sharing.


originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: dffrntkndfnml
Lord God never commanded the woman not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The woman was not even formed from Adams Rib when Lord God gave the commandment to Adam. Lord God didn't even know that he was going to create woman until much later.

I see it that way too.The ideas of those who I have discussed this with offline tend to bring up their conception of God into the mix.Personal name vs other names and images for example.I think at it's root the story related in this part of Genesis is parable about how one chooses to use their sense of judgement navigating their spiritual experiences.A part of me gets upset when people put down women using the story, because I had been guilty of this in the past.


originally posted by: spy66
The woman was also not cast out of the Garden of Eden. Only Adam was cast out. Because he was the one who broke the Law. And only Adam was formed from the Dust on the ground. Eve was not. Eve was not taken from Earth, nor made from it.

It is specifically mentioned in verse 23 who is being cast out.


23
Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.


Your second observation is good food for thought.I hadn't contemplated that before.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI



Originally posted by DISRAELI
I take "you have done this" as being about what the metaphorical entity has done.
I take "you will do this" as addressed to the literal physical species of snakes.
(Obviously the writer who puts them into the same sentence isn't subjecting it to careful philosophical analysis)

That is probably closer to your first option than your second.

That really will have to do. If you ask me again, I will just paste a link to my "posts in thread" and leave it at that. There is nothing more I can give you.


But if it's closer to the first option then should expand on your answer…for obvious reasons…


There’s clearly two elements to the question (1) the literal behaviours of a snake and (2) does the snake literally exist…

Not sure why you can’t answer the question in a straightforward manner to be honest… I don’t know whether you’re being deliberately evasive, but it sure feels that way…

I can answer both question easily…for example...


Does the text use literal behaviours of snakes (1) my answer = Yes, it uses literal behaviour of snakes to describe their actions.

Is the snake literally real in the story…(2) my answer =…No, I don’t believe it’s a literal snake, although I do think the snake represents something that is anti-Christ…

There, you see, I just answered both elements of the question…why can’t you do the same…

One last time…

Do you believe that Genesis 3:14 is referring to a literal Serpent/Snake...?


- JC



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join