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.

 

Found. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...

Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen




posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

Jesus Christ is the tree of life.

The other tree of the duality leads to destruction.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
The OP may be on dangerous theo-illogical ground. God is most essentially, Love. However, a good case can be made that both good and evil proceed from God. Check out what Moses said to God in Exodus 32:12, "Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people." Yes, God even repents. Back in Genesis, God even repented that He had made man.

If God made the garden, the tree of Life, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, did He not already know good and evil Himself? Of course, He did! However, Goodness is more essential to His character.
edit on 1-11-2011 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah


To say that God is good or evil is illogical. He is neither good nor evil, he is above it. Good and evil are human terms we gained from the knowledge of good and evil. God just is what he is, which is why he told Moses "I AM that I AM" He was being honest. He has also said in the OT "it rains on the just and unjust alike" and that "I create life and bring destruction". Obviously our concept of good and evil are not his concepts of good and evil. God is not human, he even admitted this when he also said "your thoughts are not my thoughts, your ways are not my ways" and these are all biblical, look them up.

Basically what YHWH was saying is that we cannot ever hope to understand him, because he is so far beyond us, that we are just better off obeying the laws he has set down for us, because knowing what he knows would make our heads explode. You do what he tells you to and hope like hell (have faith) he knows what he is doing. We are on a rollar coaster we have no control of so sit back, relax and enjoy the ride.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...

Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen


Matthew Ch. 1
[20] But while he[Joseph] thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftySinister

Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...

Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen


Matthew Ch. 1
[20] But while he[Joseph] thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.


Whats your point, i've had santa claus... Pacman, super Mario... A few of my Warcraft toons... and many other things appear to me in dreams...

It means nothing... And it wasn't even quoted by Jesus.. And if it didn't come from the bible anyone else would disregard it as well




posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by LeftySinister

Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...

Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen


Matthew Ch. 1
[20] But while he[Joseph] thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.


Whats your point, i've had santa claus... Pacman, super Mario... A few of my Warcraft toons... and many other things appear to me in dreams...

It means nothing... And it wasn't even quoted by Jesus.. And if it didn't come from the bible anyone else would disregard it as well


What's a point? I thought we were all mad here!



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

Yahweh is Jesus Christ's pre-incarnate form and is also referred to many times in the OT as "the angel of the Lord".
The God who was the entity who became Jesus was a pure spirit being above angels.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 

Ugh...you lose me with the whole "evil god of the old testament" and "good god of the new testament" for a few reasons.

1) Everyone in the new testament acknowledges them as precisely one and the same - they are following through on the story and the exact same god from the old testament, honoring his words, commands, and will, and acknowledging his truth.

2) This completely disregards the reality of the bible itself - there are more examples and testimonies to god's grace in the old testament than in the entire new testament (the NT being a smaller portion of the bible may play into this somewhat), and by volume, more references to the wrath of god in the new testament as pronounced by Jesus and the apostles.

3) To argue for a distinction between "gods" in the old and new testament completely destroys the basis and justification, and hence the validity, of the entire new testament as it is ENTIRELY rooted in and dependent on god and his claims as presented in the old testament.

Very much smacks of gnosticism and claims of the demiurge, etc., with no recognition of the interconnectedness of the bible. If you're going to throw out the bathwater, you have to chuck out the baby as well.
Here, let me go through this list of claims:
1. False
Because: No one in the new testament acknowledges them as precisely one and the same.
2. False
Because: There is no evidence for the reality of the bible itself, if you mean the OT when you say, Bible. Now what I mean is there is no evidence for a god going by the name YHWH who was anything but a minor deity who was related to storms from the south. There was a Temple in Jerusalem which was a Jebusite city but no evidence that it was dedicated to a god named YHWH. There was probably a sort of connection made during the Babylonian period between that people and that particular god by picking out one they knew of who had a name which had a similar sound at the beginning.
3. False
Because: The entire new testament as it is NOT ENTIRELY rooted in and dependent on god and his claims as presented in the old testament. There are a couple sketchy parallels between certain dispersed fragments of info in the OT and some aspects of the Christ which did materialize but need no confirmation from an antiquated book, considering there was already a proto-typical Christian-like religion already in existence who the members of readily adopted Christianity when it was presented to them without having to dig through that book.



edit on 3-11-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 06:06 AM
link   
The tree of life for me is different than the tree of knowledge. Knowledge is bearing fruit in the mind (Nous / Intellect / Reasoning). The tree of life is bearing fruit in the spirit (Consciousness / Awareness / Removal of the Veil). We are currently under a veil so that we must discover the two trees ourselves. This is the emerald to be dug from the mine, or the pearl to be retrieved from the depths. The process is to first find the fruit of knowledge by toil. God said that we would toil on the earth as a punishment for taking the fruit. God's intent was to give the fruit in time. We took the fruit, so now we must work for it instead of receiving it as a gift.

Genesis 3 tells us that the tree of life is protected by the flaming sword. The flaming sword must be removed. How is it removed? Pride was the cause of our fall from our original place of glory. The flaming sword protects the tree of life, which is the next step in our evolution after we gain the fruit of knowledge. In other words, we must first gain knowledge, but the flaming sword ensures that we gain the wisdom to use that knowledge. What keeps us from using knowledge well? Wisdom. What ensures our wisdom? The consuming fire of God cutting away our pride.

Confucius said, "I hear and I forget. I see and I learn. I do and I understand." God knew that we needed to fall in order to get back up. This is failure to success. Our world is filled with these examples of doing to learn. It really is the only way. God cannot be blamed for sin, so satan was banished here with two ultimate goals in mind. Goal one was for satan to eventually be overcome on earth by mankind. Once satan is made the footstool of God, mankind would then reign in his place. The process of overcoming is our training to eventually receive the tree of life and live forever with God in His kingdom. What is the key to overcoming?

We must learn to give our pride to God by loving Him and others. This is the great commandment. Love, if found in the consciousness, is the single thing needed to fulfill all law. If we love God and others, there is no other need to ensure that we live from the tree of life instead of the tree of knowledge alone. Wisdom and love and virtue are all tied to the use of knowledge with restraint.

Our example is to all of the fallen in the universe. Ephesians 1-4 reveals the mystery of our next step in this chain of events with the families in heaven. It could be that this process is followed for all wombs of life (planets). The true kingdom is beyond the terrestrial realm. Since flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom of God (universe) apart from taking earth with us, then we must transcend earth. John 3 gives the clue how to do this.

We must be reborn into the spirit. To do this, we must first overcome the water of the material world (baptism). We are the prodigal son who leaves and returns a man.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

1. False
Because: No one in the new testament acknowledges them as precisely one and the same.

I would say Stephen's presentation (recounting the history of Israel in part) to the sanhedrin in Acts chapter 7 by itself is sufficient to argue against this, but the new testament is otherwise full of confirming references to god and his words, prophets, and history from the old testament, never once (that I can tell) arguing in any way against him being the same god they are espousing, honoring, or acknowledging as precisely the same god they continue to follow.


2. False
Because: There is no evidence for the reality of the bible itself, if you mean the OT when you say, Bible. Now what I mean is there is no evidence for a god going by the name YHWH who was anything but a minor deity who was related to storms from the south. There was a Temple in Jerusalem which was a Jebusite city but no evidence that it was dedicated to a god named YHWH. There was probably a sort of connection made during the Babylonian period between that people and that particular god by picking out one they knew of who had a name which had a similar sound at the beginning.

As we've discussed previously, then you are also arguing against the claims made by the characters in and the veracity of the new testament as they (including Christ) referenced and acknowledged the historicity of the old testament accounts and the claims made within them as their history and truth.


3. False
Because: The entire new testament as it is NOT ENTIRELY rooted in and dependent on god and his claims as presented in the old testament. There are a couple sketchy parallels between certain dispersed fragments of info in the OT and some aspects of the Christ which did materialize but need no confirmation from an antiquated book, considering there was already a proto-typical Christian-like religion already in existence who the members of readily adopted Christianity when it was presented to them without having to dig through that book.

Again, then, you continue to disregard the profusion of new testament character references to the prophecies, authors, and stories from the old testament as the authorities they referred to for their claims and actions. Christ acknowledged the teachings and claims of Abraham, Moses, Jonah, Isaiah - directly referenced and often quoted these and others, as did many of the other new testament stories and writers.

One can read through the new testament and find dozens if not hundreds of references and appeals directly to identifiable old testament verses as valid and true, with no arguments, suggestions, or even vague allusions to the contrary. To deny the veracity of the one is to place the other firmly on shifting sands and remove any sensible basis for the vast majority of its directly-attributed claims and teachings.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 

. . . the new testament is otherwise full of confirming references to god and his words, prophets, and history from the old testament . . .
Obviously God did not all of a sudden come into being when Jesus starting telling people about him. God, by definition, would have always been around. The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16. But this does not mean that the God described by Jesus is relegated to the definition that priests and theologians of the "Hebrew" tradition created.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

Not necessarily.
Who has more authority in interpreting the O T?
The Jews or the Christians who usurped it?

Remember that the Jews thought Eden where man was elevated while Christians reversed this authoritative view to a fall.
More $$$$$$ in guilt I guess.

Apologies, not sure I'm following this line of reasoning - all of the "christians" who wrote the new testament were in fact israelites/jews themselves. Even Paul who primarily taught on this fall of Adam was a pharisee and apparently pretty strict in his following of jewish traditions and lines of thought until after his conversion.

As far as the Jews' views on Eden, I'd have to make a point of looking into that directly, but the old testament is also quite well stocked with god's condemnation of man's general wickedness (as well as an account of all of mankind becoming so generally corrupt and polluted as to have to effectively wipe the slate clean and start again with just the family of Noah...), but I will agree with the unstated in that I don't believe in inherited original sin - mankind is just generally predisposed to not walk according to the will of god.


This kinda proves that we are addicted to tradition and culture and not to a God or religious creed.

I can understand the argument, but I also can understand that god is effectively alien to us (as are, by extension, his purposes and needs for what he has done - a lacking but working correlation is human scientists working with lab animals - the animals would likely view a good bit of the work as wicked and cruel, even if it's for a misunderstood or otherwise greater good of which they aren't or can't be aware), and that most of the referenced cases can easily apply to enforcing the needed history of Israel & teachings of god as well as ensuring the bloodlines required for the fulfillment of Christ's redemptive work.

So, while one can argue that god was evil in the old testament, you have to equally extend the same claim to the god of the new testament as they are part & parcel - and even the new testament is not free of the wrath of god as I already mentioned. The new testament is NOT just the sugar, spice, and everything nice of the bible - plenty of references to judgement, rejection, destruction, and the righteous accounting of god...confirmed throughout as the same god recorded in the OT.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16. But this does not mean that the God described by Jesus is relegated to the definition that priests and theologians of the "Hebrew" tradition created.

Fair enough, and true - and to say that this same god is not the one taught of and preached in the old testament is without merit as it discounts all of god's grace, forgiveness, compassion and desires also relayed in the OT.

I will not seek to limit god to any description or account ever provided by man, regardless of where, as god is boundless and cannot be merely limited to such definitions and description - but that doesn't change the fact that such definitions and description accounts for in the writings and traditions of Israel also refer to the same god Christ himself acknowledged and taught, as he himself upheld and recognized the histories and their truth on many occasions.

In short, Christ did not appeal to any new authority, he reached directly back to and confirmed god as taught throughout the old testament on a regular basis.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Akragon



"You can judge whoever you like, though it is to my knowledge... Not our place to judge others. Though christians seem to think they can "judge rightiously"... i disagree."

If man did not judge what is good or evil, as shown in this clip, do you think you would like to live there?

www.bing.com...#

If someone raped your wife, would you still think it to not be your place to judge the perpetrator as evil, or would you just not judge and watch?

Regards
DL


Why do people always have to throw that at me...

IF i had a wife, said person would have to kill me before that happening. A husband is there to protect his wife.

Theres no need to judge such blatant evil, its quite obvious... and in such extreme circumstances certian rules are thrown out the window... At least for me...

Im not one to stand there and let violence happen, though i will take the responsibility of such actions if someone tried to screw with my friends/family...



Yes. Based on the judgment or judging that you say you do not do.

Regards
DL



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

Jesus Christ is the tree of life.

The other tree of the duality leads to destruction.


God was not much of a father to A & E then was he?

What would you make sure A & E ate from first and foremost in Eden?
Any worthy parent would insure life first.

Knowledge without life is rather useless. Impossible as well.

Regards
DL



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

Not necessarily.
Who has more authority in interpreting the O T?
The Jews or the Christians who usurped it?

Remember that the Jews thought Eden where man was elevated while Christians reversed this authoritative view to a fall.
More $$$$$$ in guilt I guess.

Apologies, not sure I'm following this line of reasoning - all of the "christians" who wrote the new testament were in fact israelites/jews themselves. Even Paul who primarily taught on this fall of Adam was a pharisee and apparently pretty strict in his following of jewish traditions and lines of thought until after his conversion.

As far as the Jews' views on Eden, I'd have to make a point of looking into that directly, but the old testament is also quite well stocked with god's condemnation of man's general wickedness (as well as an account of all of mankind becoming so generally corrupt and polluted as to have to effectively wipe the slate clean and start again with just the family of Noah...), but I will agree with the unstated in that I don't believe in inherited original sin - mankind is just generally predisposed to not walk according to the will of god.


This kinda proves that we are addicted to tradition and culture and not to a God or religious creed.

I can understand the argument, but I also can understand that god is effectively alien to us (as are, by extension, his purposes and needs for what he has done - a lacking but working correlation is human scientists working with lab animals - the animals would likely view a good bit of the work as wicked and cruel, even if it's for a misunderstood or otherwise greater good of which they aren't or can't be aware), and that most of the referenced cases can easily apply to enforcing the needed history of Israel & teachings of god as well as ensuring the bloodlines required for the fulfillment of Christ's redemptive work.

So, while one can argue that god was evil in the old testament, you have to equally extend the same claim to the god of the new testament as they are part & parcel - and even the new testament is not free of the wrath of god as I already mentioned. The new testament is NOT just the sugar, spice, and everything nice of the bible - plenty of references to judgement, rejection, destruction, and the righteous accounting of god...confirmed throughout as the same god recorded in the OT.


I agree that God is alien to us.
As an alien, he should be rejected as man's prime example.
Man should lead men. Not some klingon or Ferengy.

As to Jesus.

Do you not think it immoral to line up to try to profit from his murder?
God set all the conditions for his death and I call that murder and here you are trying to profit from a horrendous and immoral act. Tsk tsk. Shame on you.

Regards
DL



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

As an alien, he should be rejected as man's prime example.
Man should lead men. Not some klingon or Ferengy.

When the example is a good one, as in the case of the teachings of Christ (or Gandhi, MLK, or any such other of wisdom), I'll follow it regardless. The example of man in general, however, has let me down time and time again.


Do you not think it immoral to line up to try to profit from his murder?
God set all the conditions for his death and I call that murder and here you are trying to profit from a horrendous and immoral act. Tsk tsk. Shame on you.

Funny, that...I thought it was the jewish and roman leadership who set the conditions for his death (and, you could make the argument, merely god who foresaw it and used it for the accomplishing of his will).

Do I feel it's immoral to accept a gift that has been offered, or that has been bought at a hard price? Of course not. As far as judging the morality of such a thing, refer back to the scientist example above. We fumble in the dark to understand what is moral or not, and ants could judge the morality of almost any human activity in error in light of their perspective and awareness of greater things beyond their scope.

Take care.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Akragon



"You can judge whoever you like, though it is to my knowledge... Not our place to judge others. Though christians seem to think they can "judge rightiously"... i disagree."

If man did not judge what is good or evil, as shown in this clip, do you think you would like to live there?

www.bing.com...#

If someone raped your wife, would you still think it to not be your place to judge the perpetrator as evil, or would you just not judge and watch?

Regards
DL


Why do people always have to throw that at me...

IF i had a wife, said person would have to kill me before that happening. A husband is there to protect his wife.

Theres no need to judge such blatant evil, its quite obvious... and in such extreme circumstances certian rules are thrown out the window... At least for me...

Im not one to stand there and let violence happen, though i will take the responsibility of such actions if someone tried to screw with my friends/family...



Yes. Based on the judgment or judging that you say you do not do.

Regards
DL


Yes what?

That makes no sense, what are you saying yes to?




posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 

Fair enough, and true - and to say that this same god is not the one taught of and preached in the old testament is without merit as it discounts all of god's grace, forgiveness, compassion and desires also relayed in the OT.
According to what?
If something good happens, and God does it, and the priests gather at the idol and sing, "Baal brought the rain!", and Elijah says, "No, Baal is just something you made up.", does that negate the good thing God did? No because God still did it, even though the priests wrongly claimed Baal did.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
According to my understanding of your position, and what you said that I was responding to:

The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16...

You seem to be implying this view of god is antithetical to god as described in the OT. As I've understood your position for our various discussions: OT god = evil and mean, NT god of Jesus = good and nice; OT = unsubstantiated myths, NT = indisputable truth.

Such a position overlooks the positive attributes ascribed to the OT god, as well as the negative attributes ascribed to Jesus and the NT god, as well as the reliance of the NT's references and claims on the OT it acknowledges without dispute or suggestion that the god referenced in it was a wicked critter they no longer acknowledged as theirs.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join