Was Eve correct in rejecting God?

Was Eve correct in rejecting God?

This clip is a near perfect analogy to what Eden would have been like with mankind not having the knowledge of good and evil.

www.bing.com...#

Eve eating from the tree of knowledge would be like her mentality going from what you see those young adults thinking, to that of the thinking of the time traveler. From pure innocence bliss to that of having a moral sense and the lose of innocent bliss.

In the myth of Eden, Eve was first to eat of the tree of knowledge. She, as God states, became as Gods, knowing good and evil. She then applied this new knowledge and wisdom and chose to reject God as mankind’s best example and master. She chose instead to draw Adam to her new reality. That of having the moral sense of God along with human nature. Analogous to Jesus later.

She, like some today, would have seen God as less fit to rule mankind than mankind equipped with the knowledge of good and evil. This can be shown by some of the epithets that are given to God.

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

What would you choose?
Would you accept God, or would you reject him?
Is mankind better led by a human God or by an invisible God who would deny mankind a moral sense?
Would you step up to the highest form of humanity, or stay in a blissfully ignorant in Eden?
Is God nature + human nature better than God nature alone? Jesus thought so.

Regards
DL

Yale University series.
www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Greatest I am


What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

its true. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden for eating from the tree.

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

I see that you do not see my position.
I do not see Eden as man's fall at all and do not blame Eve but praise her good sense.

I follow more of the Jewish thinking. It is after all their work and they are likely better at interpreting their work than those Christians who reversed the Jewish view of man's elevation to man's fall.

www.mrrena.com...

Regards
DL

I thought it was Adams first wife Lilith, who told God where to go.

Originally posted by FlawlessLegend

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

its true. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden for eating from the tree.

Yes. Rather like us beating our children for wanting to learn and improve.

Regards
DL

I believe the God who is mentioned in the biblical text was a another more advanced human being in which sought to manipulate his genetic creation of our species to obey his every whim like a pet. However the knowledge received (hypothetically of course) was the knowledge of the creation or rather the existence in itself that we are all a part of (energy) to be the true and that is the only difference between human and god is that knowledge once she had the knowledge what good was a god who is jealous and wishes to keep you blissfully ignorant and a man does his dog? I for one would choose to make my own path with the knowledge of existence rather than let some god even though he is my creator dictate me all the days of my life like a father attempting to rule over his sons life till death its just not.... right haha.

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by FlawlessLegend

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

its true. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden for eating from the tree.

That is a simplistic story to describe something entirely different message to humanity. Apples, the Reptile and he was a standing reptile because afterward the deity in power "made" it to slither on the ground after that....I mean if you are going to believe parts you may as well take everything..... gardens and even Eves disobedience are all symbolic and it did not really happen that way at all. The Bible is based on an earlier tale and so lets go back to that or you are discussing what amounts to a forgery expressly created and designed to subjugate and control.

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Greatest I am

 

What a ridiculous and preposterous assumption. Eve never rejected God. That is just a story someone told you to get you to be religious and blame the fall of humanity on your wife.

I see that you do not see my position.
I do not see Eden as man's fall at all and do not blame Eve but praise her good sense.

I follow more of the Jewish thinking. It is after all their work and they are likely better at interpreting their work than those Christians who reversed the Jewish view of man's elevation to man's fall.

www.mrrena.com...

Regards
DL

I detected this but still hesitate to discuss what I think is a re-write. You certainly do present a new and interesting perspective and I agree that to find the basis of Christianity you need to dig deeper and go farther back to the Jewish History. Christians are like late arrivals to a grand party that was already going on.

reply to post by Greatest I am

. . . an invisible God who would deny mankind a moral sense?

I think the tree is a connection to other gods, the Chthonic gods, versus the sky gods and the ocean goddesses. The good/evil tree is the life/death tree. Adam and Eve were the priest and priestess of the Lord cult and their ritual was to eat the Lord's fruit from the trees the Lord planted for that specific purpose. The life/death good/evil tree was from the earth which the Lord planted his garden on top of. By eating from the fruit of the death tree, they acknowledged the reality of those other gods, by performing the ritual of eating their fruit.
The Lord offered life, and just keep on living a really long time. The Lord was quite at a loss of how to deal with people once they were dead. Once you are dead, then you are in the hands of the gods of the underworld. For the living to submit to and to worship, those gods, while they are still alive, goes against the desires of the god of the air and the wind, who is of the space above the earth.
The story of those first people is a story and the point I think is to lead people away from any sort of worship other than to that god who rides on the storm clouds, Baal, oops, I mean YHWH.

Interesting post.

While I agree with your premise of God's personality and the inane logic that is the story of Eden, I reject the comparison to the movie scene of "The TIme Traveler" as being what Earth "WOULD" be like if the story were different and Eve did not bite the apple.

The scene of the movie depicts a group of perpetually young people, who are oblivious and callous to the value of life, and willing to let one of their own drown. But in Eden death would not have been introduced, period. There is no indication that reproduction would have occured either, as the movie describes these people as being our future prodingy, and Eve's biblical children weren't born until after the event.

The movie portrays a society that has gone backwards into ignorant bliss, rather than a divine essence of just being, which is what I get from the description of Eden before the fall/ascension of mankind. Although the bible puts Adam and Eve in a physical garden, I would pose that living in pre-fall Eden would have been more of a "Fairy like" existence than that of Cro-Magnum man, that lived side by side in the mudane reality of survival.

I think the story of Eden represents the souls conscious decision to leave the ease of pure spirit to enter the gravity pit that is the creation, just for the learning the dance of pure experience. My 2 cents....

Well a lot of people do believe that the fruit of Eden is good and that god never rejected Eve for eating it.

GoOD morning... new dawn tent risers,



WOWOWL … this is exactly yocto why "I" love my ATS'ers… even the NSA'ers looking for the next denture bomber

THANX… G… for this… OP pope tart poster… other wise "I" would be at my local 'Jump Start My Neurons Egg Nog Latte' tis the season watering hole… BUTT JOINT!!!… U wouldn't ALL SEE me in a Circe/Church e"I"therr… since U never know when Mr Jesus(aka?) comes to destroy the 'god of money foundation built temple$' down … (Issa told them that God cared not for temples erected by human hands, but that human hearts were the true temples of God )

Not to mention for some reason… there are more and more eXpensive cars in the PO!Olots too… makes it to high clASS of an eXclusive club... for me now... BUTT I'd rather give my money to a bar tender... then 'CRYstoli CathedNOTreal' charity... unless they take it on the rocks

So I pray(sorry butt... no repent the end is here ) for this reply… posted onto the ATS'is forbidden digi-garden... of mother board knowledge… with a donation from my own sIEEd vault of... HOLY-VPN ...allowance… hoping not to get 'OFF TOPIC' kicked out again … of this place... "I" call my second heaven under the digi-mustard tree …(Moreover HaShem said: because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched-forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet )... would this B-EVE ... In the cloning Nephiliam lab called E.D.E.N

"I" also find it so amazing that… with the human BIG EGO MOTHER OF ALL MAGOG-WAR$ … BIG QUANTUM BANGING ... the end of humanity as YE-ALL sheeple know it before 9-11… YE-ALL still are looking for the beginning of it all… this MUST Sirius---(b)… why the real God/Original source... chosen ones are always hanging around this ATS digi-altar … after all…(His disciples said to him, "When will the (Father's) imperial rule come?""It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, 'Look, here!' or 'Look, there!' Rather, the Father's kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it." )…

GALACTIC LEVEL ENOCH CLUE KEY ANSWERS … to Ur 'Out Of This World' brain ejaculation of a neuronic thought... BUTT!!! please guys... don't run out and buy Ur girls a on... Unless ... please keep it clean ...(Simon & Peter said to THEM(?), "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."
Jesus(aka? but not THEM?) said/says, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven." )

Mr X-ULTRA/ORGANIC-TEQUILA-SUN-RISE... with organic spicy chUrros ... What seasoned ATSer wants to have a quick breakfast byte with me

reply to post by Greatest I am

What would you choose?
Would you accept God, or would you reject him?
Is mankind better led by a human God or by an invisible God who would deny mankind a moral sense?
Would you step up to the highest form of humanity, or stay in a blissfully ignorant in Eden?
Is God nature + human nature better than God nature alone? Jesus thought so.

I'm reading Thomas J. J. Altizer's book, The Gospel of Christian Atheism available as pdf from: Religion-Online.org. An interesting excerpt:

If religion is understood to be a backward movement of return to an original sacred,
does this give us a proper basis for assessing the uniqueness of Christianity? Surely it gives us
insight into the presence of universal religious forms within the historical body of Christianity:
a nostalgia for a lost paradise, a quest for an original innocence, a cultic re-presentation or
recollection of a sacred history of the past, a conception of faith as contemporaneity with an
ancient or long’ distant epiphany of Christ, a belief in a primordial God whose very sacrality
annuls or negates the existence of the profane, and a longing for an eschatological End that will
be a repetition of the primordial Beginning. ... Above all, a reborn and radical Christian faith must renounce
every temptation to return to an original or primordial sacred, or to follow a backward path
leading to an earlier and presumably purer form of the Word, or to seek a total silence in which
both Word and world will have disappeared.

- - Altizer, pg 22/99

This might not be the best quote, but Altizer contends that a religionless Christianity accepts death as a matter of fact, without imagining some way to "get back to Eden".

There is no original innocence, death has always been an integral part of existence. To imagine some primordial innocent/deathless state is religion. The "god" of this religion blames the fact of death on the humans. That god is lying.

I find the statements by Dr. Kaufman rather disturbing:

Although a few of the Rabbis occasionally lament Eve’s share in the poisoning of the human race by the Serpent, even they declare that the antidote to such poison has been found at Sinai; rightly holding that the Law of God is the bulwark against the devastations of animalism and godlessness.
. . .
The Golden Age of Humanity is not in the past, but in the future (Isaiah II and XI); and all the children of men are destined to help in the establishment of that Kingdom of God on earth.
www.mrrena.com...

The Sinai myth is precisely what introduces "god" ordered genocide as a means of establishing this "Golden Age of Humanity" spoken of. That's to put Eden into the future, through a generational long haul of religious legalistic regimen of purging out the "lesser humans".

No. That god needs to be rejected at the beginning and the end. He is no Alpha/Omega.

Originally posted by CosmicWaterGate
Jesus(aka? but not THEM?) said/says, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

)

Mr X-ULTRA/ORGANIC-TEQUILA-SUN-RISE... with organic

spicy chUrros

... What seasoned ATSer wants to have a quick breakfast byte with me

Here is your breakfast byte my friend.

In the beginning, God created Man, the species.

The separation of man and woman comes secondary, and each have attributes necessary for our survival.

Good thing too. If we did not need each other for our survival, we probably would have killed each other off for being blinded by our physical differences.

Differences are nothing to be ashamed of. That is the lesson here.

No fig leaf covers my tally-whacker before God and Man.



With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by Greatest I am


How could eve not reject god? It's human nature to be curious, to explore, to seek knowledge and understanding.

I put it to you, that eve could not have made any other choice...

reply to post by pthena

That god needs to be rejected at the beginning and the end.

Paul said, "Just as there are gods many . . ."
The idea being rejecting gods is a full time job.

Rather than arguing whether the myth is literal or not, I'm going to try to answer the question posed.

I don't think Eve had a choice. It was always the intent of God, such as it were, for man to fail. Because failure is interesting.

Imagine a world of perfection without want if you could for a moment. Imagine a world where the right choice was always clear, where there was no separation between any life or energy, and where there was simply bliss either of complete ignorance or complete acceptance. As appealing as it might be to some, it is undeniable such a mode of being would be entirely static.

If Eve doesn't take the apple, man might as well be a tree, from the moral perspective.

But I don't accept your phrase that Eve rejected God. Rather, she walked the path that was intended for not just her, but all her descendants, and that God intended for himself. After all, if God chose to become man and singled out this physical plane as having some meaning, it would mean there is something to be creatures of knowledge and ethics living in a world where they are not always assets.

reply to post by jmdewey60

The idea being rejecting gods is a full time job.

Wikipedia-Epicurus
The gods do not punish the bad and reward the good as the common man believes. The opinion of the crowd is, Epicurus claims, that the gods "send great evils to the wicked and great blessings to the righteous who model themselves after the gods," when in reality Epicurus believes the gods do not concern themselves at all with human beings.

"It is not the man who denies the gods worshipped by the multitude, who is impious, but he who affirms of the gods what the multitude believes about them."

By the time of Epicurus, 341 BCE – 270 BCE, it was already obvious to philosophers (lovers of wisdom) that the gods didn't need or require anything from people. From the quote above, it's the impious who think that the gods reward good with good and bad for bad.

The only gods that really need rejecting are the ones demanding this or that from people, such as OT Yahweh, I read Habakkuk recently and was amazed. It's a lot like Job. The eternal question, "Why does violence and injustice prevail?"
Yahweh answers, "Just keep looking and see how I raise a mighty army to kill and destroy!"
The prophet says, "Now wait a minute, aren't you the god who claims to be too pure and righteous to look upon evil?"
Then Yahweh replies, "don't worry, I'll destroy the army once I'm done with them. Then I'll be totally famous throughout the World! That's what's important to me after all."
And then the prophet sings a song of praise:

Chapter 3
2 Yahweh, I have heard of your fame.
I stand in awe of your deeds, Yahweh.

3 God came from Teman,
the Holy One from Mount Paran.
His glory covered the heavens,
and his praise filled the earth.

5 Plague went before him,
and pestilence followed his feet.

That's just plain sick, to praise the "god" who claims responsibility for war, plague, and pestilence.

I think that it's rather counterproductive for people to read the Old Testament and think they are gaining wonderful life lessons. Better to read Aesop's Fables for moral lessons, at least there's no question of whether they are holy, or literal, or whatnot.

reply to post by pthena
I got this book in the mail Saturday, The Emergence of Christianity: Classical Traditions in Contemporary Perspective by Cynthia White.
I was reading the first chapter, where she describes briefly the Roman style of god worship which involved offering sacrificial animals to a particular god, one appropriate for that god as a quid pro quo, fully expecting something back in exchange.
The Epicureans would most likely have looked at that sort of thing rather askance.