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.

 

The Archetypal Psychology of the Adam and Eve Narrative

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astrocyte
are hunter-gatherers.

I wonder whether we can posit a third category, a category of "plenitude", which has as a consequence a sort of 'transcendence' of physical needs as normally understood.

Could it be that such a situation obtained in the fertile crescent 15,000 years ago?

Following the end of the last ice age, the region known as the fertile crescent bloomed and flourished from all the run off water coming down from the ice sheets in the north. If 15,000 years ago this lush state of affairs begins, and 12,000 years ago, evidence accumulates that a climate change appears to have caused that region to lose plant and wildlife, then we have what looks like 3 different periods.

A period of "Eden", from 15,000 to 12,000 years ago. And then a period of 'dissemination', where the human race went in the direction of either Cain (which literally means "to acquire") and Abel (which literally means "vapor", i.e. to be on the move).

It's an interesting thing to contemplate.


What about an allergory of an historical event and a case of mistaken identity like the Illad and the Trojan war, where the death of Able and his line the equivalent of the extinction of the Neanderthals, only difference is they were bred out for the most part, by us sapiens and are the only surviving line of Adam...which would other wise be Cain line...us.

Maybe this is why Abrahamic religions are so strict of about bloodlines and sex?
edit on 20-5-2018 by Specimen because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 21 2018 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

I know allegory, but the subject matter projects considering op has a history. There you are going on about emotional stimuli just like the op. He has this whole theory about shame. He singles out people that criticize him, and yes I have to say that the subject of Christianity is a personal one. This man is not "thinking." Everything this man says about himself is his own very specific narrative. He was abused at the age of 2 and says it's occultic. Thus anyone who reacts harshly to him must be in turmoil. Bout the end of that. The fact that I might have 5 or 6 things in my past I'm not so proud of somehow evidence his shame based theory and now we're all stuck here with a guy who thinks everybody owes him elaborate conjectures or is just afraid of his wisdom. I'm done because any social scientist would chuck it. Oh now he's going the gnostic route. I happened to mention it in my last post to this man. N-joy.


edit on 21-5-2018 by Ohthewey778 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2018 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Specimen

I'd be down for some of that as long as it didn't infer. I mean I'm leaning towards your posts in subject matter but keep in mind, my attention span is limited, the op would say it's brainmind fearbased shametrauma as a very very little boyoie lol and I don't know if I can quite tear into every last aspect. Hey we're all human were all imperfect and as the op who has theorized that he and his inventive narrative clan somehow jumped back in time and foullly molested me as a vewy vewwy little boieoyie , he is narrative IMPERFECT..exit stage left...




edit on 21-5-2018 by Ohthewey778 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2018 @ 12:44 AM
link   
The subject of Christianity is a personal one and so is his life story and I don't think this guy has answers but boy does he pontificate like he's the bees knees. I resent this man saying that his inappropriate conjectures have any place in this discussion and attempts to tell him to bog off are dialogue that he's "observing" He's a silly player. Most people just know how to back off.

I'm not going to mention specifics of my past because it isn't important.

I don't think it proves anything about how emotional reactions and stuff are I mean that's pretty much a myth.

I don't like this guy making conjectures. He believes that if people make effort, it's emotion, that it is evedence he is doing his job correctly, he uses the theory that there is no self in order to dissolve people's attempt to dissuade him, and then acts as if people pointing it out are just hurt. Or because of symmetry that we are all just here to offer him food for thought that he can't infer himself by not being such a snipe.


It's his own making out session...he'll run you dry



edit on 21-5-2018 by Ohthewey778 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2018 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Dude what are you getting on about. I haven't read any of the OP's other posts but right now this is YOUR making out session... OP has presented an interesting perspective. Even if i don't agree with all of it, there's a lot there that is really neat and thought provoking. Also, to OP, I really enjoyed your post after this one. I will reply more if I get a chance!
a reply to: Ohthewey778



posted on May, 21 2018 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Beware this man, if you criticise him he'll treat you like a "favorite." He'll "warm" to you. He'll read your personal sore spots and weave them into a narrative that pulls you back into having to call him out. He'll place himself as apparently a source of discomforting stimulus due to the fact you "must know it's true" and its reflexive self guarding stuff. It's emotion. And he knows the source. Cause he's a smart smart man. He posits somehow that he is causing an ultimate amount of trauma and moves to your source to "love you" s' more. The mods don't catch it. He's not that bright but you don't have to be to peeve people off on a message board. I'm too not into it and I hope this man just boogies..



posted on May, 21 2018 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Boomy327

Not your discussion. Sorry boy. Don't know you. Not into the hassle. If you like what the man has to say that's your opinion. I've made peace and I'm done now. I'm leaving this crick-hole where it began. Y'all be good




posted on May, 21 2018 @ 07:02 AM
link   
You can do anything in paradise. The secret is, you're being watched by an audience. Hence you're "naked".

Once you find this out, you are vulnerable and decide to “cover up”. As a result, the show is just not the same. Those who were watching don't like this and you're cast out. THE SHOW IS OVER.

(Adam and Eve was just a reality show with a couple who didn't know they were being watched.)



posted on May, 22 2018 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

Hi Astrocyte—

You seem to think that that the Origin Myth of Adam and Chayya beginning in Gen chapter 2:4b contain certain profound psychological underpinnings on the part of the ancient Yisroelites--but you will have to step back a little from the text and recall (or learn for the first-time) that the two two (quite contradictory) Hebrew Creation myths in the post-exilic Torah (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a and Gen 4:b to 3:24) had in fact been lifted whole-cloth from far older non Yisroelite, ‘pagan’ Creation myths (some fragments which were discovered in the (Semitic) ancient Babylonian and Assyrian archives) which themselves had been earlier borrowed/adapted/stolen (at least in the basic story elements of these divine creation myths, including the Tree of Life and the Serpent) from far older (and in many ways more sophisticated) non-Semitic culture of Sumer.

So in the case with the two contradictory Creation Myths of the nomadic Hebrews, it was more a matter of literary theft (or more polirtely, ‘borrowings’) from far older and more settled civilizations than from any real or new contributions.

Having said that, it is curious that in the first Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a), ‘male and female’ are ‘created’ together by nothing more than a divine word (and not ‘formed’ from any clay as in the second Myth) ‘and Elohim called their name Adam in the day in which they were created…’ In other words, there is no Chayah (i.e. Eve) in the first myth at all, but parity between male & female. Perhaps this peculiar feature of the first creation myth of post-Exilic Yisro’el would speak more loudly in the 21st century with the roles of women in society being redefined in the West along a more egalitarian footing.

Certainly the 2nd Hebrew Creation Myth (which begins out of the blue, as it were, in Gen 2:4b in the Hebrew Torah) is essentially a misogynist’s field-day, with ‘Chayyah/Eve’ assuming the brunt of the responsibility & consequent punishment (like some Jewish versions of the Greek’s naughty bringer of horrors into the world, Pandora) for first daring to partake of the ‘forbidden fruit' (whatever that was) in the Garden, thereby unleashing untold miseries upon humankind, from the pain of childbirth and the need to work to survive and culminating in death.

The literary exposition in ‘the Bible’ of the ‘Original Sin of Eve’ still resonates to-day in the human subconscious-collective in the West, and is a grim reflection and even in some cases the cause of male fear/distrust and (albeit ‘subconscious’) ‘loathing of the female’ in general by modern human (Terran) males that we see all over the world even to-day—especially in places where such ancient (and overtly misogynist) Creation Myths as these harmful & senseless Hebrew myths are repeated (from earliest childhood) and drilled unconscionably into the skulls of males—and are oftentimes believed (at least by immature or simpleminded persons) to be ‘literally true’ simply because it’s in the Bible’.

IMHO it’s high time both Pandora & Chayyah ‘went the way of all flesh’ so that this whole nasty cycle of cultural misogynist indoctrination of both Terran males and females can stop once and for all and men can start regarding women as their equal partners and not their property or chattel—e.g. to be sold (or ‘given away’) at Weddings.



posted on May, 22 2018 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohthewey778

With all due respect, I would avoid getting personal myself.

He’s entitled to his opinions, we all are



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Hey dude?? I don't even know you and this is a thread from like 2 days ago. But have a blast and i'll see you around the boards..


Bfffff....hahahahaha...:stop:
edit on 23-5-2018 by Ohthewey778 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohthewey778

I wouldn't take his theories/threads to heart, even though they can appear abstract, or little smug about it but I do find some of his works very informative, although daunting as well.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohthewey778
a reply to: Willtell

Hey dude?? I don't even know you and this is a thread from like 2 days ago. But have a blast and i'll see you around the boards..


Bfffff....hahahahaha...:stop:



We good bro chill out...



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem
The Devil is Cherubim. Fallen Angelic, alien to Earth.

Very powerful, very old, very wise compared to us.

Adam and Eve were the first created in Gods own image. They were to be only temporarily below the angels, but above them after their life on Earth. The Devil was filled with pride, and envy, and he fell, taking others with him.



WRONG!! Categorically WRONG!! Tell PastorDave or whomever is CHARGING You for religion™ and get Your $$$ back, don't fret TheChurch™ has a bunch of $u¢ker$ lined up to take Your spot...

What is guarding The Ark of The Covenant? (on top of box; acme; apex)


In Christianity, the cherubim are known for their wisdom, zeal to give glory to God, and their work helping to record what happens in the universe. Cherubs constantly worship God in heaven, praising the Creator for his great love and power. They focus on making sure that God receives the honor that he deserves, and act as security guards to help prevent anything unholy from entering the presence of a perfectly holy God.

What about Adam's first wife?

witcombe.sbc.edu...



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Metaphysically, you have to look at each character in the story as some inner faculty in all of us.
That’s the key to understanding what happened to us.

The Devils, Jinn, or Satan's job was to shield Adam from the solar heat—meaning the high-velocity creative and spiritual energy— until Adam was mature enough to handle that.
So naturally, the forbidden Tree (creative energy) had to be withheld from Adam for a time consequently the prohibition “go not upon this tree”
That was the fire energy=The Jinn-Devils. That’s why the Quran says Iblis was of the Jinn

They were not devils of course at this time since they had not rebelled as of yet and surreptitiously inform Adam of his “shame” or his weakness. His vulnerability in that he had to be shielded for a time by the actions of this Jinn.


The Lord--Divine energy

The Angels- hold the light and power energy

Transcendent-Human--Divine knowledge

Humans= earth energy

Jinn- Fire and extension energy

The animals =the anima energy


The Transcendent-Human archetype was The Lord going around instructing Adam about the inner paradises, held down the Knowledge energy

Six natures

Divine
Angelic
Transcendent human
Human
Jinn
Animal

The 7th nature is the nature of the holistic self. All these natures are held within the holistic nature

We have all of these inner natures inside of us. The allegory of Adam and Eve is the story of the interaction of these inner elements and how each of them in perfection holds down their relative light and energy field.

edit on 23-5-2018 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Sigismundus



Lilith's creation after God's words in Genesis 2:18 that "it is
not good for man to be alone"; in this text God forms Lilith out
of the clay from which he made Adam but she and Adam
bicker. Lilith claims that since she and Adam were created in
the same way they were equal and she refuses to submit to
him:


GENESIS 2:21-23 21 So the LORD God caused a deep
sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of
his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22The LORD
God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from
the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said, "This
is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be
called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man."…

1 Corinthians 11:8
For man did not come from woman, but woman from man.

1 Corinthians 11:9
Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

One traditional interpretation of this second Creation story
(which scholars identify as the older of the two accounts) is
that woman is made to please man and is subordinate to him.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 12:09 PM
link   
The fall happened when the fire energy stopped doing its job.

The story of the devil approaching Adam and trying to get him to eat of the forbidden tree is merely this Devil or Jinn trying to show Adam his vulnerability or his shame.


So he eats thereof through being tricked.

This is not a God cursing Adam! It is merely the results of an immature malleable human of earth energy taking upon itself too much fire and power—Jinn energy.

It’s just like starting heroin use. It’s not a curse that ruins you but the very nature of the powerful drug.

Therefore, over time we had to suffer because we basically took the Job of the powerful Jinn energized beings place--who was to shield us from that-- which we weren’t equipped for.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 12:16 PM
link   
So we fell on two levels—physically and metaphysically or inside and outside.

Outside, by descending into the creative matrix and inside because of the inner garden of States-EDEN (paradise was corrupted) And we lost the contact with its operation.

It became what is called
An Ellipse imperfect circle.

Ellipse is derived from the word we all know--Apocalypse



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: JimNasium

Hi Jimbo--

The 2nd Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 2:4b through 3:26) does indeed seem more 'primitive' in overall content & style of utterance--especially with its talking snakes and other childishly-expressed divine anthropomorphisms ('and Adam heard the sound of YHWH-Elohim walking around in the garden in the cool of the afternoon...') but it is still debated in scholarly circles whether the actual language being employed in this 2nd Creation Myth (in this case, un-pointed paleo-Hebrew) can be proved to be chronologically older than the 1st Creation Myth (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a); the only thing that can be said for certain is that their language dialects are quite different, posturing two separate writing-schools (the 1st Myth seems to have a more Babylonian feel in terms of technical terms (e.g. Heb. Tehom[ah] v. Bab. Tiamat), and closely resembles the language employed by the same literary school of the wacko-prophet Hezekiel c. 580 BCE), whereas the 2nd Myth seems more cognate with the Anatothian Hebrew dialect of the prophet Jeremiah (e.g. in its use of there phrase 'YHWH-Elohim' (aka KJV 'The LORD God') as opposed to 'Elohim' &tc.

Either way, the 2nd Creation Myth of the post-exilic Jews in the 'Hebrew Scriptures' is unashamedly misogynistic in tone, with Adam being created before 'Eve' (Heb. Chayyah aka Heb. ha-Ishah) who was herself 'formed' out of the side of 'the man' (ha-Ish) as a sort of second-class, afterthought creation; what is even worse, as the more sexist, orthodox-extremist Rebbe's like to remind women on this planet, e.g. 'Adam alone had the Breath of Life breathed into his nostrils, so that Adam became a 'living Soul' (Her. Nephesh); whereas Chayaah did not receive the Breath of Life directly from YHWH-Elohim, therefore Eve (Heb. Chayyah) does not herself possess a 'soul' like a man and is therefore to be regarded as less of a human being than Adam...'

It is this kind of inherent sexism that permeates a great deal of the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures (as well as the Dead Sea Scroll writings)--which admittedly were (probably) all written by men--and has percolated (through Judaeism's two bastard-cousins, Christianity & Islam) down to the present day and is the source of much pain and suffering among modern 'working-women' in the West who at the moment are desperately trying to find a habitable space in today's post-industrial world (i.e. trying to balance a challenging and competitive career-path with the energy-draining and time-consuming obligations of raising a modern family.

To imply that 'women must be obedient to their husbands' just because some purportedly-ancient collection of middle-eastern zionist-propaganda tracts says so is to abrogate the power of Terran humans for self-empowerment and disallows the creation of a level playing-field for both sexes, each of whom should be treated with the same level of respect and honour. Taking the silly pre-scientific creation myths of the post-exilic Jews as any kind of a valid guide to living in the 21st-century post-industrial West is not conducive to moving the cause of gender-equality forward, and is something that should be utterly eschewed by all thinking persons who consider themselves in any way 'humanitarian'.



posted on May, 23 2018 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JimNasium

Hi Jimbo--

The 2nd Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 2:4b through 3:26) does indeed seem more 'primitive' in overall content & style of utterance--especially with its talking snakes and other childishly-expressed divine anthropomorphisms ('and Adam heard the sound of YHWH-Elohim walking around in the garden in the cool of the afternoon...') but it is still debated in scholarly circles whether the actual language being employed in this 2nd Creation Myth (in this case, un-pointed paleo-Hebrew) can be proved to be chronologically older than the 1st Creation Myth (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a); the only thing that can be said for certain is that their language dialects are quite different, posturing two separate writing-schools (the 1st Myth seems to have a more Babylonian feel in terms of technical terms (e.g. Heb. Tehom[ah] v. Bab. Tiamat), and closely resembles the language employed by the same literary school of the wacko-prophet Hezekiel c. 580 BCE), whereas the 2nd Myth seems more cognate with the Anatothian Hebrew dialect of the prophet Jeremiah (e.g. in its use of the phrase 'YHWH-Elohim' (aka KJV 'The LORD God') as opposed to 'Elohim' &tc.

Either way, the 2nd Creation Myth of the post-exilic Jews in the 'Hebrew Scriptures' is unashamedly misogynistic in tone, with Adam being created before 'Eve' (Heb. Chayyah aka Heb. ha-Ishah) who was herself 'formed' out of the side of 'the man' (ha-Ish) as a sort of second-class, afterthought creation; what is even worse, as the more sexist, orthodox-extremist Rebbe's like to remind women on this planet, e.g. 'Adam alone had the Breath of Life breathed into his nostrils, so that Adam became a 'living Soul' (Her. Nephesh); whereas Chayaah did not receive the Breath of Life directly from YHWH-Elohim, therefore Eve (Heb. Chayyah) does not herself possess a 'soul' like a man and is therefore to be regarded as less of a human being than Adam...'

It is this kind of inherent sexism that permeates a great deal of the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures (as well as the Dead Sea Scroll writings)--which admittedly were (probably) all written by men--and has percolated (through Judaeism's two bastard-cousins, Christianity & Islam) down to the present day and is the source of much pain and suffering among modern 'working-women' in the West who at the moment are desperately trying to find a habitable space in today's post-industrial world (i.e. trying to balance a challenging and competitive career-path with the energy-draining and time-consuming obligations of raising a modern family.

To imply that 'women must be obedient to their husbands' just because some purportedly-ancient collection of middle-eastern zionist-propaganda tracts says so is to abrogate the power of Terran humans for self-empowerment and disallows the creation of a level playing-field for both sexes, each of whom should be treated with the same level of respect and honour. Taking the silly pre-scientific creation myths of the post-exilic Jews as any kind of a valid guide to living in the 21st-century post-industrial West is not conducive to moving the cause of gender-equality forward, and is something that should be utterly eschewed by all thinking persons who consider themselves in any way 'humanitarian'.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join