The tree of what knowledge?

TheConstruKctionofLight
So was adam/eve fully conscious when the edict to not eat of the trees given. The FIRST time we hear of any independent word, thought uttered by either human is in the conversation between the serpent and eve in the beginning of chapter 3.

The discussion is more complex than it could have been, because I've been treating the story in two different ways.
The first post was a take on the more standard version of the story, while the second post was attempting to harmonise the story with what modern science tells us about the growth of the human race, and is necessarily more speculative.
In the straight story as the writer records it, there is no doubt that Adam and Eve understand the command they have received. If Eve did not understand it, she would not have been able to report it to the serpent.
Only in the more evolution-friendly approach of the second post comes the suggestion that they had no consciousness before "eating the fruit", and then the idea of a warning command becomes more problematic.
It becomes more a case of identifying instinct with "following God's will", so that moving away from instinct is also a moving away from God's will.

This brings up the question I raised at the end of the post about God's final intentions.
Now Israel's history gives examples of God making use of institutions which were not part of his original intentions. The kingship came into existence against his advice, but he made use of it. He told David that he did not need a temple, and that if he had wanted a temple he would have asked for one, but he still made use of it.
This encouraged me to make the suggestion of the last sentence in that post, that even if the development of consciousness was a "fault", God could still make use of it as a stage towards a re-alignment of our conscious wills with God's will.
I used the phrase "Felix culpa"; this is the term normally used for the idea that the Fall of Man was really a good thing, because it brought about the work of Christ. I have borrowed it for the suggestion that the growth of consciousness, whether a "fall" or not, was beneficial as a stage towards the New Jerusalem.

Incidentally, I don't think there is any genuine difference between "helpmeet" and "wife". The first word is just a description of the chief purpose of a wife.

SisyphusRide
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

I think it is quoted that way in the KJV of the bible, specially when comparing the old and new testament... In some parts you'll read stuff like "that old serpent" it is an addition to the description of the object or being.

I've read it somewhere all in one like I posted it, I'll have to dig it up... everytime I hear it though or it's referenced my noggin always interprets the full title.

edit on th033913p0700000039R03 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)

No it is not written that way in the authorized King James Bible

It is because of that fall that God orchestrated the guided all events to Christ and made it possible for all men to know and come to him through the Death of His son.

Truly god is a god of salvation but by the same process of knowing good and evil a man must make the judgement to accept God's sacrifice of His son or to reject it, so that God is faultless for their sinful condition.

reply to post by ChesterJohn


yes it may not be written that way directly...

but "knowledge of good and evil" as it is worded is actually the knowledge of life and death, light and darkness you're going to read about in the following pages.


Revelation 12:9.
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

-the 4 descriptions given here are describing "lucifer"

reply to post by DISRAELI


Wise men used fables to explain difficult topics to illiterate listeners.

The fables were not true. These are usually fabricated to explain some thing.

The Adam and Eve story is of the same genre - a story fabricated to explain that man and woman were pure in their thoughts until temptation came in the way.

People tend to forget the purpose of such stories and take every story told by a wise man as true. This is not the correct way. The correct way is to understand the meaning and not take it literally.

reply to post by GargIndia

I could accept that statement with this qualification- that in the eyes of anyone who believes in the Biblical God, it was God who put the "fable" into this writer's mind.
With that reservation, I am doing exactly as you suggest- looking for the intended meaning of the story.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Learn to distinct the two: What is good or bad in and of itself and what is neither?

Learn from God: Know the son, and you will know the father. - In other words: Know thyself, and you will know God.

Sump3
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

Learn to distinct the two: What is good or bad in and of itself and what is neither?

Learn from God: Know the son, and you will know the father. - In other words: Know thyself, and you will know God.

You will never know god. Because GOD is No-Thing.


Thats what it means to say: know the son and you will know the father.

I have been studying the Garden of Eden scenario for a while and from what I can figure out, the actual fruit from the tree was "free will". All true knowledge and wisdom appears to comes from free will choices and the knowledge that every being is specifically responsible for their decisions. So upon the imparting of the knowledge of good and evil, the being becomes a sovereign being with conscious choices.

The next part of this tree of life puzzle was explained by the Gnostic texts, which say the god of the new testament is not the same God from the old testament. The new biosphere of Eden was supposedly created by Satan, and in the Gnostic texts they say Satan and Sanat Kumara are the same being, with the letters switched to confuse us. Not sure if I am on board with this theory yet, and need more info to assess. Additionally, those same Gnostic texts explain the reason our lives were shortened is so we could/would not evolve beyond the level of our controller/creator being. This explains the distinct amnesiatic cycle whereby when we perish we are sent back through the reincarnation process with no earlier information so we always have to begin at the beginning again.

Moreover the Tree of Life has now been altered so the top circle of the pattern is deleted. The top deleted circle is Heaven and supposedly this keeps us locked in the circle/cycle of life and death. The Heaven is where your spirit is always connected in a tangible way to the original Almighty, unknowable God. Originally we were supposed to be going back to the REAL GOD after every incarnation to recharge and reconnect with you true spirit source. By removing the Heaven circle the Human now has his connection to source disconnected more and more over each lifetime the being is unable to return to source.

So we were locked into the cycle of incarnations and cut off from the source.

Animals do not know good or evil, and do not think of themselves as naked. Nakedness being a perspective of one's body that is not natural. It's artificial, the view of someone who differentiates themselves from animals and who wears garments. Did God wear clothes?

I don't think the tree scene and act was something we were banished from, but it gave us something and it may occur again whereby we gain even more. or perhaps we escaped from someone who seems to have lost control.

reply to post by passit

Yes, that was the kind of consideration which put the theme of the second post into my mind, identifying the Fall with our gradual "detachment" from nature.

kauskau

Sump3
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

Learn to distinct the two: What is good or bad in and of itself and what is neither?

Learn from God: Know the son, and you will know the father. - In other words: Know thyself, and you will know God.

You will never know god. Because GOD is No-Thing.


Thats what it means to say: know the son and you will know the father.

The teaching of Jesus has got entangled with many other people, who were simply not his stature.

The problem with Bible is that it is hard to distinguish from Jesus's message from others.

There is no son of God. There can be none. As God does not take human (or any other) form, and does not sire any children. God is immortal and omnipresent (omnipresent means the universe is contained in God).

Since Jesus is no more, he cannot come to justify what is written in Bible.

I advise you people to read a thread by 'Vedatruth' on ATS. You can search for it.

DISRAELI
reply to post by passit

 

Yes, that was the kind of consideration which put the theme of the second post into my mind, identifying the Fall with our gradual "detachment" from nature.

agree, although calling it "detachment" is something I might challenge, only because we still have the ability to become animal-like, but the other awareness we have is something we desire to use more.

I read a fascinating book about Hunters in northern Siberia who practice becoming like caribou in order to get closer to them. So sounding like them, wearing skins and antlers, moving, etc. in order to establish a trust with these animals. The book goes on to talk about how some hunters lose themselves in the experience and when the hunt is over need time alone to come back to human society.

So I would call the fall as an event whereby we gained another perception that gave us a broader awareness that we are attracted to like bees to honey as compared to the more natural awareness of animals.

I'll try to find the name of the book

reply to post by passit

Perhaps "detachment from nature" was too strong.
But self-consciousness is a kind of detachment, a sense of being "different", and "other" from what is around.

This thread ought to be taken in conjunction with;

Did they eat from the tree of life?

The discussion is further continued in;

With knowledge comes death?

reply to post by DISRAELI


I doubt it OP. I like to think of the tree of knowledge as a grape tree with fermented grapefruit sized grapes. That's what I was inspired to think one day so I'm sticking with that paradigm.

The idea that the fruit was sex makes me think you're not even serious about this topic at all.

On7a7higher7plane
The idea that the fruit was sex makes me think you're not even serious about this topic at all.

That was not my suggestion.
It is one of the ideas which has entered popular culture and I was disagreeing with it.

Surferess
I have been studying the Garden of Eden scenario for a while and from what I can figure out, the actual fruit from the tree was "free will". All true knowledge and wisdom appears to comes from free will choices and the knowledge that every being is specifically responsible for their decisions. So upon the imparting of the knowledge of good and evil, the being becomes a sovereign being with conscious choices.

The next part of this tree of life puzzle was explained by the Gnostic texts, which say the god of the new testament is not the same God from the old testament. The new biosphere of Eden was supposedly created by Satan, and in the Gnostic texts they say Satan and Sanat Kumara are the same being, with the letters switched to confuse us. Not sure if I am on board with this theory yet, and need more info to assess. Additionally, those same Gnostic texts explain the reason our lives were shortened is so we could/would not evolve beyond the level of our controller/creator being. This explains the distinct amnesiatic cycle whereby when we perish we are sent back through the reincarnation process with no earlier information so we always have to begin at the beginning again.

Moreover the Tree of Life has now been altered so the top circle of the pattern is deleted. The top deleted circle is Heaven and supposedly this keeps us locked in the circle/cycle of life and death. The Heaven is where your spirit is always connected in a tangible way to the original Almighty, unknowable God. Originally we were supposed to be going back to the REAL GOD after every incarnation to recharge and reconnect with you true spirit source. By removing the Heaven circle the Human now has his connection to source disconnected more and more over each lifetime the being is unable to return to source.

So we were locked into the cycle of incarnations and cut off from the source.

Fruit is fruit not a knowledge itself.

Eating the fruit did not do anything but fill their stomachs. It was the act of disobedience of Adam that brought about both the knowledge of good and evil and Death. While Eve ate being deceived Adam did so with a free will.

There was no mystical power or knowledge in the fruit or the tree. The tree was the object of Adams instruction not to eat of. When he hate his heart understood he disobeyed and that was evil and that the good was to obey. The result of his disobedience was knowledge of right (good) and wrong (evil) through the act of disobedience. From that day forward he would have a free will to choose right or wrong, good and evil. The promise of death was given because he disobeyed and that disobedience was called sin and the result of sin was death and death spread to all men because all have sinned (Rom 5:12).

very simple if you just take the word of God literally and believe what you read without admixture of interpretation. The AV Bible is already interpretated so no need to interpret we just need to Read, study, believe and apply it to our lives.

On7a7higher7plane
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

I doubt it OP. I like to think of the tree of knowledge as a grape tree with fermented grapefruit sized grapes. That's what I was inspired to think one day so I'm sticking with that paradigm.

The idea that the fruit was sex makes me think you're not even serious about this topic at all.

sounds like Dr Peter Ruckman