Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Febble · 04-02-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The woman that was taken from man is knowledge (or truth) as an entity of its own but without an identity of her own. The woman is the sea that was first separated from the water above and later into basins below so that dry land would appear for us to walk on without knowing where we are going but only that we are going as if led by the nose.

This would be where our Tree of Knowledge (Tabula Rasa) is isolated from the Tree of Life which contains the water that we cannot walk on [just yet] but wherein we have son-ship with the father above once we know who we are down below. So the woman ours in betrothal because she contains the water wherein our reign of God is to be found and we will crown her queen of heaven and earth when we become one with the father above, once again, except now we have some water to add in the form of knowledge that must be raised before it is ours to enjoy (until then it is borrowed learning because we do not know who we are).

The above may not answer your question but it shows that Mary (the woman) is our inspiration to Love while Eve is the woman we take to be our wife. Eve is temporal in the illusion of life that is created in Gen.3 when we became rational beings while Sophia (Elizabeth) is eternal in truth with Mary being the mediatrix (beauty) between heaven and earth while we are on earth as human. We call her the HS until she is 'within us' to be our gate to heaven and key to the kingdom of God.

But how do you know that? Did you figure it out? What is the source?

Chili · 04-02-2006, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febble

But how do you know that? Did you figure it out? What is the source?

I might be able to find some bible passages but I did not think that you would appreciate them.

Just go to Gen.1 where water above was seperated from water below that was gatered into bodies of water to make dry land appear for man to walk on in the human condition after their eyes were opened by the TOK in Gen.3.

Then we (as Catholic), can leave Gen. where the cherub (woman) and the revolving sword (man) are left behind to gaurd the Tree of Life and continue in the NT when we encounter this same cherub who will teach us to how to walk on this water untill we as man arrive in the new heaven and new earth where the sea is no longer in Rev.21:1.

It is just a thought that I put forward and doesn't have to be true.

Febble · 04-02-2006, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

I might be able to find some bible passages but I did not think that you would appreciate them.

Just go to Gen.1 where water above was seperated from water below that was gatered into bodies of water to make dry land appear for man to walk on in the human condition after their eyes were opened by the TOK in Gen.3.

Then we (as Catholic), can leave Gen. where the cherub (woman) and the revolving sword (man) are left behind to gaurd the Tree of Life and continue in the NT when we encounter this same cherub who will teach us to how to walk on this water untill we as man arrive in the new heaven and new earth where the sea is no longer in Rev.21:1.

It is just a thought that I put forward and doesn't have to be true.

Thanks for sharing anyway! I'm actually a catholic too. Here is a thought from me. When I don't understand something, I try and write a story.

Cheers

Lizzie

Chili · 04-02-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febble

Thanks for sharing anyway! I'm actually a catholic too. Here is a thought from me. When I don't understand something, I try and write a story.

Cheers

Lizzie

WOW, that was more like stretched out mid-summer nights dream in the middle of winter. Very poetic and filled with beauty.

I actually wrote you a story earlier but my computer ate it and I forgot what was in it. Isn't that awful?

MJ67 · 04-02-2006, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The order is the same but not the words. Gen.2:17 NAB "From that tree you shall not eat; the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die."

What came first the tree or the word of God? The KJV or the NAB? You are trying to rewrite the record, aren't you?

Quote:

Doomed to die means to know that you will die for which two identities are needed

Okay, so let me jog you back to my earlier question...If they are doomed to die if they should eat of the tree, then they had immortality to begin with. Stands to reason, does it not? One cannot be doomed to die if one has to eat from the tree of life in order to remain living unless one is compelled to eat of that tree of life. In which case, free will has no say in the matter regarding what one ingests, hence that belief is out the door. Subsequently, since that tree of life (providing your interpretation does not suggest an alternative meaning,) is nowhere to be found today, but man is all over the inhabitable planet, it is safe to say that biblical god had no need to remove man from Eden, he just could have done away with the tree of life. So, free will for one, according to your rewriting of the good book, never was a commodity given to the man made out of dust and the woman out of dust's rib, and man was never created immortal to begin with because he was dependent on eating from a tree to continue such a state.

Chili? Did god create food allergies and taste buds?

Quote:

Our body is not us but our body is the manifestation of God on earth under the identity of Lord God (the material cause) as man in the image of God before woman was taken from man.

Then, you mean we too are like the Christian Jesus-manifestation of God, and you mean too that God looks just like us, like the male species only or is it gender unspecific given the below?

Quote:

Mortality was created when woman was taken from man to be his "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" (formal cause) but had not found a final cause until man ate from the TOK with 'to eat' being in the efficient cause.

So Adam was mortal before Eve came along, immortal after she was made, which required its continuation not by god's desire but by the eating of a tree, then mortal again after Eve ate of the wrong tree, and the idea of mortality therefore was an afterthought for the omnipotent god?

Quote:

...wherein God is limited to mankind for mankind.

So which is it, is god omnisicient, omnipotent and everlasting or is his existence limited by that of man's?

Quote:

It should not matter to us that we "shall surely die" except that we assumed the wrong identity when we ate from the TOK and became the imposter that we identify with in our every day life. This would be our persona wherein we have individuality that was built on our tabula rasa (blank slate)...

Can you point out the specific verses of the bible where it speaks to this for me?

Quote:

The Tree of Knowledge is needed to isolate knowledge and call it our own. ...

Okay, so since eating of the tree of knowledge isolated knowledge, it would it be safe to say that knowledge was abundant. Why then would god fear the isolation of knowledge, and how do you justify the fact that today, man's knowledge is isolated even though the tree which according to you would have caused isolation, was removed?

Regarding the rest of your philosophical leanings, as with my question above, please provide biblical references.

Chili · 04-02-2006, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ67

What came first the tree or the word of God? The KJV or the NAB? You are trying to rewrite the record, aren't you?

Record? Genesis came last and was not written until man arrived at the end and recognized the place he first started as if for the first time.

Quote:

Okay, so let me jog you back to my earlier question...If they are doomed to die if they should eat of the tree, then they had immortality to begin with. Stands to reason, does it not?

No, immortality has nothing to do with dying but with knowing that we will die.

Quote:

One cannot be doomed to die if one has to eat from the tree of life in order to remain living unless one is compelled to eat of that tree of life. In which case, free will has no say in the matter regarding what one ingests, hence that belief is out the door.

But the tree of life has nothing to do with eating nor does the tree of knowledge have anything to do with dying. The tree of knowledge is our conscious mind where we ALSO know that we will die. The TOK is the place where we are divided in our own mind and therefore know that we will die.

Quote:

Subsequently, since that tree of life (providing your interpretation does not suggest an alternative meaning,) is nowhere to be found today, but man is all over the inhabitable planet, it is safe to say that biblical god had no need to remove man from Eden, he just could have done away with the tree of life.

Both 'trees' exist in the mind of each sentient being and is wherein we have our dual identity. One as man and the other as human which is the reason why we do not have a free will but only think that we have a free will.

Quote:

So, free will for one, according to your rewriting of the good book, never was a commodity given to the man made out of dust and the woman out of dust's rib, and man was never created immortal to begin with because he was dependent on eating from a tree to continue such a state.

Free will is not a commodity but a state of mind and so is immortality. Mortality pertains to the body and immortality to the essence after which the body is formed.

Quote:

Chili? Did god create food allergies and taste buds?

No he didn't. We did as co-creator with God.

Quote:

Then, you mean we too are like the Christian Jesus-manifestation of God, and you mean too that God looks just like us, like the male species only or is it gender unspecific given the below?

God indeed is masculine but not male.

Quote:

So Adam was mortal before Eve came along, immortal after she was made, which required its continuation not by god's desire but by the eating of a tree, then mortal again after Eve ate of the wrong tree, and the idea of mortality therefore was an afterthought for the omnipotent god?

Man was immortal before Adam was and Eve was not made but woman was taken from man. Man and Adam are not the same nor is woman and Eve. Man is God and woman is the immortality of Lord God while Adam is conjectured and Eve is the mortality of Adam, who, without a body of knowledge also could not die . . . wherefore Magdalene was left in the dark and did not recognize Jesus after he died.

Quote:

So which is it, is god omnisicient, omnipotent and everlasting or is his existence limited by that of man's?

Only our humanity dies and our body returns to dust.

Quote:

Can you point out the specific verses of the bible where it speaks to this for me?

In Mat.27:63 he was called an imposter but also in Gen. 3:10 when man first realized that he was naked for which two identities are needed. One is being naked and the other is seeing shame which did not yet exist in Gen.2 where they were both naked to wit and therefore felt no shame.

Quote:

Okay, so since eating of the tree of knowledge isolated knowledge, it would it be safe to say that knowledge was abundant. Why then would god fear the isolation of knowledge, and how do you justify the fact that today, man's knowledge is isolated even though the tree which according to you would have caused isolation, was removed?

But God does not fear knowledge because the plan of redemption was already in place when God first divided the waters below from the waters above. The only concern of God is that man will lose sight of his own immortality and eventually will suffer and die.

Quote:

Regarding the rest of your philosophical leanings, as with my question above, please provide biblical references.

Some other time, maybe.

MJ67 · 04-03-2006, 06:29 PM

And you know Chili, all the confusion would have been avoided if only Cain hadn't cured his hemp so well that god thought the stench of burning flesh was what actually drove him to hunger. Unfortunately, since Cain was the original farmer, man has been paying ever since for not being able to reproduce such a crop.

That's my one and only take on your philosophy, Chili.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-03-2006, 06:29 PM	#17
MJ67 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 20	And you know Chili, all the confusion would have been avoided if only Cain hadn't cured his hemp so well that god thought the stench of burning flesh was what actually drove him to hunger. Unfortunately, since Cain was the original farmer, man has been paying ever since for not being able to reproduce such a crop. That's my one and only take on your philosophy, Chili.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.