Adam and Eve - Why was Knowledge Evil

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: akushla99

Do you have thoughts that you didn't intend on thinking? I believe everyone has them.

When you see someone attractive, the first thought that pops into your mind could be nothing, pure or sexual.

Did you concisely choose what thought you were going to have, or did you just have a thought?

thought is a fundamental human activity familiar to everyone, there is no generally accepted agreement as to what thought is or how it is created. Somehow, thoughts arise in the mind through the product of subconscious brain processing. en.m.wikipedia.org...

Where, how and if thoughts even exist within the body is not clear. That thoughts appear to our awareness, on a giant projection screen (to which we are the audience), is all we know.www.psychologytoday.com...

Has a thought ever passed through your mind that you didn't feel was your own? I'm not talking about tin foil hats and thoughts beamed from outer space. I mean the ordinary moments when something occurs to you and you have to wonder where it came from. These orphan thoughts are especially common when we encounter someone different from us.www.psychologytoday.com...

I am not suggesting something nearly as radical or schizophrenic as you might think. Psychology can't answer the question. So my answer is Spiritual.

Add - I believe thinking is active but thought is passive. Our passive thoughts can be good, bad or indifferent, but we have them without first thinking about them. After we have a thought we can choose to think about it, act on it or let it go.

I'd have to agree with most of that, but the mechanics of diversionary thought are fairly well known (generally speaking)...and the notion I have been pushing, in relation to the OP, is the notion that (in my humble opinion), even taken as a parable the A&E story exhibits that it was a human mind that wrote it, and was not as divinely inspired as feted...because there are psych-tradeoffs that appear that would not be consistent with the maneuverings of an Omniscient Source. The bones of the story suggest that parts are definitely missing, prompting intent to be invented, in a mostly condensed form...the subject is much larger than the simplified narrative would outline - Was an angles intent as simple as the invention of betrayal, that a Supreme creator allows under its omniscient gaze, to kick off the whole 'adversary' mythos?...culminating in the fabled final battle (written(?) by an unfairly incarcerated 'man of god' suffering early onset dementia? That doesn't sound like Supreme intelligence. That sounds like a set-up, and the internal logic is consistent, complete with rewrites and a 'Lord of the Rings' story written in 2 parts...but, the A&E story really sets the scene...

Å99

originally posted by: Isurrender73

In the story of Adam and Eve we know that Eve had at least some knowledge of good for she says that the fruit looked good to eat. So just as the child was deceived and ate the entire cake and thus became sick, Eve and Adam were also deceived and thus became sick.The child's punishment of living without earthly dessert lasted one week and then the child was able to return to having his desserts.Adam and Eve's punishment was to spend one lifetime out of the garden and then be returned to it.The knowledge of evil was a sickness that infected Adam and Eve just like eating too much cake caused a sickness in the child. Although the 5 year old had no knowledge of the evil sickness that would come from eating the whole cake, he was certainly able to understand the cake was good and that his mother warned him not to eat the whole cake.In a similar way Adam and Eve understood God's orders and saw that the fruit looked good, but they did not yet understand the effects of disobedience, evil.

The moral of the story

God's Laws can be stated simply, Love your neighbor as yourself, or do no harm to others.When you break this law you are filled with a sickness that can only be cured by God's medicine. The only way to receive God's medicine is to repent and return to his law of not harming others.Satan/Lucifer is not the good guy trying to give us some secret godly wisdom. He is trying to make us sick by having us consume what is bad for us.God's Laws are not intended to burden or control us, his laws are given with the intent of protecting us from sickness in our soul.Add - When you touch the fire to have knowledge of heat you get burnt by the flames.

This is incorrect.You believe the story is metaphorically literal which is a contradiction no matter how many ways you attempt o twist it.The literal story of Adam and Eves partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge and good and evil(from here forward referred to as FTGE) does not add up to any form of literal narrative because it is infused with metaphor.

The reality is serpents/snakes do not talk.They are not possessed by spiritual entities/beings in any form etc etc.The narrative is a prime example of what it is communicating.The mind of man is imperfect and misses the mark of maturity(the definition of sin).It “judges” good and evil because that is the fruit(seed) of it’s nature which is religious.

The amalgamation of all of a persons experiences form their belief in faith of “their” Belief System religion which judges the good and evil of their religions doctrines.In other words man perceives “their world” through their observation.That is the judgement perception of good and evil.The downside is it is a false perception.

What a person believes is only what they believe because everyone's Belief System(BS) is different.Mankind as a whole have many common foundational beliefs in their BS.For example most people believe in the colors red, green and blue as universally accepted truth yet it is not.The perception of color is only… a perception.The fact is color as mankind sees it does not exist.All of matter’s true reality color is infinite shades of gray.Mans perception of color is a convenience of belief not a true reality.

In other words mans belief of observation (BS religion) of their world is partaking of the FTGE.It has nothing to do with spiritual mysticism.Those are only adversaries(satans) of the mind.The reality is man lives their life “inside” their mind.That mind is bound in a prison of BS religion because that is their food(fruit/seed) that sustains it and their knowledge of good and evil is false.

That is the dilemma of mankind's condition of sin.They are bound in a prison they cannot perceive BECAUSE of their false perception of reality.They can never free themselves form their prison because they cannot perceive they are bound.They believe they have a will “free” of cause which is not true because it is anything but free and every effect is it’s proof.The will is the mechanism of the mind that makes choices however NONE of those choices are free of the multitude of causes and effects.

The belief in a will free of cause is the lock on the prison door.It is never checked because it is assumed the lack of free will doesn’t exist and the prisoner is making free will choices.The reality is…everyone is making choices according to their nature(religion) and character (their actions).That is their name.As a “people” humans are named Adam from the root adamah which means red clay or dirt/ dust.Adams nature is to eat of the dust of their nature and character. That is the prison of their religious carnal mind ruled by satan the adversary against truth of reality.

The Adam and Eve narrative is an observation from the outside.By mans nature of religion it is natural to pervert it into a religious doctrine in ignorance.That is the prison.Belief through faith of perception through observation.It is inevitable and cannot be circumvented.Mans false perception of their true condition causes them to create a world of unreality.If they believe in a foundational herd religion-religion like Christianity or Islam they color it with that observation.The more the belief in a religion-religion the more color blinded.

The religious carnal mind creates adversaries (satans) to populate their world so the ultimate “cause” is shifted from themselves.The God of their religion is made in their own image.They are their own savor.They either believe their God is a super natural being/entity or they believe they are God(even if they don’t know they believe this)...either way ..it is not truth.

The truth can only be,… if there is a creator God they are unknowable by the mind of man.A religious God can only be believed through faith.A true creator God could only be known and the true creator God would have to be the instigator and purveyor of that knowledge.The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is mans nature of religion and they eat the fruit of it.It can never cause life it only ends in death.

Fortunately for mankind true reality is not what they perceive at all however, it is true to the believer.That is the conundrum of the dilemma.Fortunately the fruit of mankind’s loins(seed) will not always be so.If there is a glimmer of life then life must be truth not death.Fortunately mankind cannot “conceive” this true life or it would just be more death.In other words NONE have been saved,born again,awakened or ascended out of their religious prison.If there is a creator God of all LIFE then they alone will do the conceiving and delivering to LIFE,then the reality of this life would be ….this life is only a conception and has not been delivered yet to LIFE because the “fruit” cannot sustain it as is.

This life must be born anew to a LIFE, not a death like all of the creation is presently in the state of.The fact of this life in the physical/matter realm is it will all end in death because that is it’s nature and purpose.There is ZERO anyone can do to change or effect it’s conception and growth anymore than you did anything to cause your physical conception and deliverance into this world.

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil IS neither good or evil it is the truth of mankind's condition.Belief of anything else is religion.

a reply to: Rex282



That's Quality!

Some are 'hell-bent' (pardon the pun) on literalising (with added fluff) the ins&outs of fairly simple concepts - especially in relation to this first 'chapter'...



Å99

originally posted by: Rex282

This is incorrect.You believe the story is metaphorically literal which is a contradiction no matter how many ways you attempt o twist it.The literal story of Adam and Eves partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge and good and evil(from here forward referred to as FTGE) does not add up to any form of literal narrative because it is infused with metaphor.

The reality is serpents/snakes do not talk.They are not possessed by spiritual entities/beings in any form etc etc.The narrative is a prime example of what it is communicating.The mind of man is imperfect and misses the mark of maturity(the definition of sin).It “judges” good and evil because that is the fruit(seed) of it’s nature which is religious.

The amalgamation of all of a persons experiences form their belief in faith of “their” Belief System religion which judges the good and evil of their religions doctrines.In other words man perceives “their world” through their observation.That is the judgement perception of good and evil.The downside is it is a false perception.

What a person believes is only what they believe because everyone's Belief System(BS) is different.Mankind as a whole have many common foundational beliefs in their BS.For example most people believe in the colors red, green and blue as universally accepted truth yet it is not.The perception of color is only… a perception.The fact is color as mankind sees it does not exist.All of matter’s true reality color is infinite shades of gray.Mans perception of color is a convenience of belief not a true reality.

In other words mans belief of observation (BS religion) of their world is partaking of the FTGE.It has nothing to do with spiritual mysticism.Those are only adversaries(satans) of the mind.The reality is man lives their life “inside” their mind.That mind is bound in a prison of BS religion because that is their food(fruit/seed) that sustains it and their knowledge of good and evil is false.

That is the dilemma of mankind's condition of sin.They are bound in a prison they cannot perceive BECAUSE of their false perception of reality.They can never free themselves form their prison because they cannot perceive they are bound.They believe they have a will “free” of cause which is not true because it is anything but free and every effect is it’s proof.The will is the mechanism of the mind that makes choices however NONE of those choices are free of the multitude of causes and effects.

The belief in a will free of cause is the lock on the prison door.It is never checked because it is assumed the lack of free will doesn’t exist and the prisoner is making free will choices.The reality is…everyone is making choices according to their nature(religion) and character (their actions).That is their name.As a “people” humans are named Adam from the root adamah which means red clay or dirt/ dust.Adams nature is to eat of the dust of their nature and character. That is the prison of their religious carnal mind ruled by satan the adversary against truth of reality.

The Adam and Eve narrative is an observation from the outside.By mans nature of religion it is natural to pervert it into a religious doctrine in ignorance.That is the prison.Belief through faith of perception through observation.It is inevitable and cannot be circumvented.Mans false perception of their true condition causes them to create a world of unreality.If they believe in a foundational herd religion-religion like Christianity or Islam they color it with that observation.The more the belief in a religion-religion the more color blinded.

The religious carnal mind creates adversaries (satans) to populate their world so the ultimate “cause” is shifted from themselves.The God of their religion is made in their own image.They are their own savor.They either believe their God is a super natural being/entity or they believe they are God(even if they don’t know they believe this)...either way ..it is not truth.

The truth can only be,… if there is a creator God they are unknowable by the mind of man.A religious God can only be believed through faith.A true creator God could only be known and the true creator God would have to be the instigator and purveyor of that knowledge.The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is mans nature of religion and they eat the fruit of it.It can never cause life it only ends in death.

Fortunately for mankind true reality is not what they perceive at all however, it is true to the believer.That is the conundrum of the dilemma.Fortunately the fruit of mankind’s loins(seed) will not always be so.If there is a glimmer of life then life must be truth not death.Fortunately mankind cannot “conceive” this true life or it would just be more death.In other words NONE have been saved,born again,awakened or ascended out of their religious prison.If there is a creator God of all LIFE then they alone will do the conceiving and delivering to LIFE,then the reality of this life would be ….this life is only a conception and has not been delivered yet to LIFE because the “fruit” cannot sustain it as is.

This life must be born anew to a LIFE, not a death like all of the creation is presently in the state of.The fact of this life in the physical/matter realm is it will all end in death because that is it’s nature and purpose.There is ZERO anyone can do to change or effect it’s conception and growth anymore than you did anything to cause your physical conception and deliverance into this world.

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil IS neither good or evil it is the truth of mankind's condition.Belief of anything else is religion.

uhh... Yea. I'm just gonna copy this and paste into every religious thread that comes up for a while. Niccccee.....

so, let me get this straight, before they ate from the tree of knowledge they had no concept of good and evil so, how would they know that it was evil or bad to disobey god? and eat from the tree of knowledge?
They wouldn`t know that they had done anything wrong until after they ate from the tree and gain the knowledge of right and wrong.

How do you expect someone not to do wrong or disobey you when they have no concept of what disobeying is or what right and wrong is?

A better comparison to the adam and eve story would be if someone told you not to farfseguim, you have no idea what that word means and they only tell you what it means after you have already done it.

originally posted by: akushla99
a reply to: Rex282

That's Quality!

Some are 'hell-bent' (pardon the pun) on literalising (with added fluff) the ins&outs of fairly simple concepts - especially in relation to this first 'chapter'...

Å99

Thanks A99,

In my experience even the hell-bent literalist are for the most part attempting to be benevolent however misguided by their theology.What is unfortunate is the lengths they can go to attempt to twist what they believe into the truth when the truth will not bend a Planck length.

The 1st chapter of Genesis is loaded with religious ammo aimed at the religious carnal mind however what is really mind blowing is the simplicity of it without the religious rhetoric.Sometime I think the gematria is immensely more significant than the meaning of the words!!..pssst...don't tell anyone though or they will be forming theology out of numbers!!....

originally posted by: Rex282
blah blah woof woof..............
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil IS neither good or evil it is the truth of mankind's condition.Belief of anything else is religion.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
and paste into every religious thread that comes up for a while. Niccccee.....

Fortunately for you....this is the short version!! Unfortunately I do something like this almost every post I make and...crickets.....

I know from much experience the deaf cannot hear however they do have very loud (and usually annoying) voices . The fact is they will only believe what they want to believe because that is their nature and character.I have no intent to change them.My sole purpose is to deny ignorance.I just so happens religion is ALL ignorance!!I think everyone's true desire is to know truth without the BS(or the BS) but believing is natural as breathing air.

a reply to: Rex282

Fortunately for you....this is the short version!! Unfortunately I do something like this almost every post I make and...crickets.....

Who can follow THAT (proverbially)

You leave us speechless. What else is there to say?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Rex282

Fortunately for you....this is the short version!! Unfortunately I do something like this almost every post I make and...crickets.....

Who can follow THAT

(proverbially)

You leave us speechless. What else is there to say?

I do tend to make some people speechless..for completely different reasons!!

a reply to: akushla99

I would be a vindictive parent (who abrogated my responsibility) if I banished my children to a lake of fire, for having no choice in thier own creation and proper upkeep...

You are blaming the wrong persons. Blame your own parents and not the Creator for proper upkeep. The Creator created only two people and all the rest of were procreated by their own improper upkeep. The two that were created by God were perfect with proper upkeep and all the rest of us are the products of mom's and pop's and their own screw up ideas. A child of God is never banished to a lake of fire. All procreated people are not children of God. A child of God is infilled with the Spirit of the Creator, not running around causing havoc among the human race. God is not guilty of what you and I do.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: akushla99

I would be a vindictive parent (who abrogated my responsibility) if I banished my children to a lake of fire, for having no choice in thier own creation and proper upkeep...

You are blaming the wrong persons. Blame your own parents and not the Creator for proper upkeep. The Creator created only two people and all the rest of were procreated by their own improper upkeep. The two that were created by God were perfect with proper upkeep and all the rest of us are the products of mom's and pop's and their own screw up ideas. A child of God is never banished to a lake of fire. All procreated people are not children of God. A child of God is infilled with the Spirit of the Creator, not running around causing havoc among the human race. God is not guilty of what you and I do.

I'm a little speechless, I have to admit. This post has folded whatever I have said into a grotesqueness beyond a direct reply.

It is far easier to invent elaborate scenarios than to man-up and take responsibility...literalists are guilty of 2 things (especially in relation to the episode that sets the scene for the whole extravaganza in the little golden book)...

1. Having not one original thought
2. Being complicit in an unending shift of responsibility based on a literal interpretation

If you love these concepts, welcome to the world of the infinite loop, you are welcome to it...and it is deserving of you...don't get too giddy...and if you do feel like throwing up, please face away from me - thanx

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

It is far easier to invent elaborate scenarios than to man-up and take responsibility...literalists are guilty of 2 things (especially in relation to the episode that sets the scene for the whole extravaganza in the little golden book)...

Quite so, I imagine, but in this case not so. Without the autographs there can be no literal understanding and if there were it would not be guilt but truth of the authors intent. You have neither to show just as others can not produce. You know better than that. Not one golden book but many golden books all connected with a silver cord. A work of some merit and many possibilities otherwise no discussion would be forthcoming. Literalist? I think not.

a reply to: Seede

The only thing worse than a biblical literalist is a biblical metaphorist. One who makes up their own metaphors and then calls them the truth.

a reply to: Woodcarver

The only thing worse than a biblical literalist is a biblical metaphorist. One who makes up their own metaphors and then calls them the truth.

One cannot be a literalist without the autographs of the author and no one can show the NT or OT autographs. Perhaps you could show then how you could translate, transliterate, or interpret unknown sources of literature when the autographs or languages of the autographs are not known. You talk foolishness. The best that can be shown are guesses by many who probably would not be accurate even if the autographs were before them. That is not a metaphorist nor a literalist but simply fact. If you can demonstrate otherwise then show the formula.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: akushla99

It is far easier to invent elaborate scenarios than to man-up and take responsibility...literalists are guilty of 2 things (especially in relation to the episode that sets the scene for the whole extravaganza in the little golden book)...

Quite so, I imagine, but in this case not so. Without the autographs there can be no literal understanding and if there were it would not be guilt but truth of the authors intent. You have neither to show just as others can not produce. You know better than that. Not one golden book but many golden books all connected with a silver cord. A work of some merit and many possibilities otherwise no discussion would be forthcoming. Literalist? I think not.

If the human brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. Anonymous

Then, (if I understand you correctly) unless one is a scholar in contemporary Greek, ancient Hebrew etc, one cannot have a view on an any of the modern language versions (which are nominally accepted as the WoG regardless of translation). Their authorship in certain circumstances can be attributed to them (which isn't really the issue)...the content is - but if the complete compiled opus is qualified by the ability to competently understand (and then agree on unknown motive [psychological & procedural], in the native tongue (nuanced by location, demographics, politico environments), assuming motive etc - any subsequent translations into any other tongue, other than its original, is pointless - and a target without a goal can be shot at by all and subdry, forever...observe the pages of the Forum dedicated to it, and all the armchair critics and officionados alike quoting direct from the various translations of the WoG.

The A&E story says they were the first couple (nice!) - from this couple came the rest of man(un)kind...What is Not contained in Jenny (despite there being an impressive genealogical list) is how 2 humans with 2 sons populated the surrounding area...that is either an unresolved plotline, a translation containing an oversight or a metaphorical fancy...I double-took when watching a plane fly past the head of a character in a historical drama (in which planes had simply not been invented)...it ruined the whole movie...and I dont need to know the mechanics of scriptwriting to spot the obvious...

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Then, (if I understand you correctly) unless one is a scholar in contemporary Greek, ancient Hebrew etc, one cannot have a view on an any of the modern language versions (which are nominally accepted as the WoG regardless of translation).

Had to stop you right there. You may have your view the same as all people have their views. A view is simply your and my opinions on material that is presented but you nor I or anyone else has the original autographs (material) to become a literalist. Regardless of the expertise of anyone, no one, to my knowledge, has the many authors original autographs and without those autographs nothing is certain which is presented.

There is much evidence that the first Christian Synagogue (Jerusalem Church) was totally Hebrew and Aramaic with no Greek or Latin influence whatsoever. Greek influence was absolutely forbidden for well over three decades. The entire organization was governed by James, John and Peter (in that order) with James being the president or Christian Nasi. The Apostles taught and preached in the Hebrew and Aramaic tongues with the liturgy being in like manner. It is by this that tradition teaches the original letters of the Apostles were also penned in their Hebrew and Aramaic tongues and then copied into Greek, Latin etc.. Those autographs are not available insofar as I understand and all else is nothing but conjecture.

No one can be a literalist in biblical matter simply because all have only manuscripts (Copies) of unknown sources. To argue a word for another word is simply a guessing game without the original word in the original language with the contextual thought. Literalist is impossible in biblical literature and that was the central theme.


It is far easier to invent elaborate scenarios than to man-up and take responsibility...literalists are guilty of 2 things (especially in relation to the episode that sets the scene for the whole extravaganza in the little golden book)...

a reply to: Seede

Pretty much what I have been saying, friend...yet Your first response to me sounded like an acceptance on literal terms.

Opinions really are like ..... And everybody has one...

Å99

originally posted by: Isurrender73
I am going to tell the story of Adam and Eve in the garden through a metaphor of a mother and child, since I think their minds were like those of little children.

Metaphor

One evening a mother baked a beautiful cake and set it on the counter. Her 5 year old came and said mommy can I have that cake.

The mother replied, you can have a piece of the cake tomorrow but you can't have the whole cake or you will get sick.

The next morning the child woke up before his mother and walked into the kitchen. As the child was gazing at the cake Satan came to the child and asked the child did your mother really say not to eat the whole cake?

The child replied yes, she said it would make me sick.

Satan replied that cake won't make you stick, your mother just doesn't want you to have it because she wants to keep it for herself. She knows that the cake is good to eat and she is being selfish.

The child looked at the cake, and it looked very good for eating. So the child ate the entire cake before his mother awoke.

By the time his mother awoke he was already feeling pain in his stomach. His mother asked, did you eat the whole cake? He replied, yes mommy Satan said you were lying and selfish.

The mother gave the child some medicine and his stomach felt better. Although the mother loved her child she decided to punish her child with no desserts for a week.

Comparison

In the story of Adam and Eve we know that Eve had at least some knowledge of good for she says that the fruit looked good to eat.

So just as the child was deceived and ate the entire cake and thus became sick, Eve and Adam were also deceived and thus became sick.

The child's punishment of living without earthly dessert lasted one week and then the child was able to return to having his desserts.

Adam and Eve's punishment was to spend one lifetime out of the garden and then be returned to it.

The knowledge of evil was a sickness that infected Adam and Eve just like eating too much cake caused a sickness in the child.

Although the 5 year old had no knowledge of the evil sickness that would come from eating the whole cake, he was certainly able to understand the cake was good and that his mother warned him not to eat the whole cake.

In a similar way Adam and Eve understood God's orders and saw that the fruit looked good, but they did not yet understand the effects of disobedience, evil.

The moral of the story

God's Laws can be stated simply, Love your neighbor as yourself, or do no harm to others.

When you break this law you are filled with a sickness that can only be cured by God's medicine. The only way to receive God's medicine is to repent and return to his law of not harming others.

Satan/Lucifer is not the good guy trying to give us some secret godly wisdom. He is trying to make us sick by having us consume what is bad for us.

God's Laws are not intended to burden or control us, his laws are given with the intent of protecting us from sickness in our soul.

Add - When you touch the fire to have knowledge of heat you get burnt by the flames.

To answer your question:
Knowledge wasn't evil.

And Adam and Eve didn't suddenly gain knowledge of good and evil by eating some fruit.
What happened is we went along with a different system of reality. Knowingly turned our backs on how things were meant to be for something "better".

Partaking in the knowledge of good and evil was basically a shift into a new dualistic existence. Before the fall there was only the whole, only life. Just the coin with no sides. We created the sides. Split the perfection into two opposing forms.
"You will surely die" He warned.
And we surely do, because we bought the opposite of life into existence.
We created the "good and bad" of everything and we can't take responsibility for it. We blame the snake, we blame the woman, we blame God and the Devil.
Pathetic!

We ruined it. Corrupted the whole thing.
It's possible to see through the falsehood of the duality corruption and what was supposed to be is there, but it's not perfect anymore. It's Chaos. Like some messed up feedback loop. After being separated it won't go back together properly. They are really just one thing but now it's in a constant state of conflict.
And WE did it...

a reply to: Ruiner1978

We created the sides. Split the perfection into two opposing forms. "You will surely die" He warned. And we surely do, because we bought the opposite of life into existence.

We ruined it. Corrupted the whole thing.

Who's we? Were you there?

As the story goes, it was God(s) who fractured Adam, splitting and removing a piece of Adam and placing it outside of himself, for his "companionship", creating separation, confusion and blame. God created the duality, God created the "corruption" of which you speak.

"We" did nothing.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Ruiner1978

We created the sides. Split the perfection into two opposing forms. "You will surely die" He warned. And we surely do, because we bought the opposite of life into existence.

We ruined it. Corrupted the whole thing.

Who's we? Were you there?

As the story goes, it was God(s) who fractured Adam, splitting and removing a piece of Adam and placing it outside of himself, for his "companionship", creating separation, confusion and blame. God created the duality, God created the "corruption" of which you speak.

"We" did nothing.

The way we perceive time is also part of the corruption.
This was not a historical event.

And again...

We created the "good and bad" of everything and we can't take responsibility for it. We blame the snake, we blame the woman, we blame God and the Devil.
Pathetic!