Chili

In that genre would it be wrong for me to suggest that God never created Adam and Eve but that God created man and that God created only man.

As I read it God created man in Gen.1 but not woman, who, instead, was taken from man and formed out of man by Lord God in Gen.2. The name Adam was given by Lord God to the conjectured image of man when he became consciously aware of his own existence after he ate from the tree of knowledge. The shame/no shame distinction made between Gen.2 and Gen.3 (with the fall of man being the effective cause of this change) tells me that Adam existed only in the imagination of man and had no genes himself but simply was the usurper of the identity that was created in the image of God.

Nothing has changed since then wherefore the Original Sin is said the be incarnate upon us today. It is not important for now if this was good or bad but it removes the historic element from the text and along with it goes the gene problem.

spin

Gen 1:27, And God created man in his own image; in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Man, H-)DM, the adam, can be both sense of the word "man" in English, the species, or the male representative, but, as the text specifies later "male and female", the text is clear that God created both of them at the same moment.


spin

Chili

The Adam will always be male until he gets crucified for it (boys will be boys). I make a distinction between Man as heavenly being and hu-man as earthly being with Man 'being' God and hu-man 'thinking' that he is God. The difference between these two is a matter of realization that actually changes a free man into a Freeman or converts the old Jerusalem into the New Jerusalem (to use an familiar metaphor).

Male and female is androgyne with the potential to become either male or female depending on the way man is formed in the womb. I think that Gen.1 is where the essence of existence was created in the 'God said and so it was' that precedes the existence of the created. I should add here that our sex is a product of our sexuality that still is an illusion but nevertheless is formed after our human condition as co-creator does his share to enact the process of creation.

My evidence here is that there is no sex in heaven (when we return to Eden) which is after the convergence of our left and right brain wherein we are human and woman respectively (in Gen.3 the left brain is temporal = TOK and right brain is eternal = TOL). Our right brain is eternal because it was taken from man to be the identity of man in the image of God. This was done by Lord God who is not the creator but is the second cause that took charge of the light that found existence in the material world. This is expressed in Gen.2 where the woman does not (and can not) have a created identity because she is the ongoing identity of man in the image of God (who therefore can bear the freeborn man in the exact image of God through the ages. I hold here that life belongs to the mythology and we just borrow temporal life to color the image of heaven on earth).

To this I can add that our gender identity can easily be different from our sex identity and it seems that this variable can change the physical sex identity of our offspring over time and in all civilizations (the boy-girl ratio is not constant). The point I am trying to make here is that our sex is not a created reality so you can't say that God goofed.

I actually place human opposite to woman as hormone driven conditions of being wherein an increase of our humanity will be at the reduction of our womanity, and vice versa. This, of course, is good but must be at the request of woman towards the accumulation of food, beauty and wisdom (woman is TOL in this context).

The plural "them" removes history from Genesis to show that the essence of creation will always precede its existence. The "beginning" here becomes the present when we come full circle, as it must, or it would be just history.

spin

What an utter load of bollox, ChiliAmos. This is the sort of free-flow associative thought one once found in bedlam.


spin

Chili

Well it works for me.

spin

You never think of your audience.

Chili

But I do and that is why I added a defense for my position. It is just an argument that finds a lot of credibility from modern science wherein our sexuality seems to be just a condition of being that fluctuates between masculine and effeminate instead of being a fixed reality.

That essence precedes existence is a long standing argument that I adhere to and no more needs to be said about that.

spin

Not true. You're too busy working up a lather.

Your "defense" is just stroking. It doesn't relate to text. It is as usual eisegesis. You cannot in any objective sense relate your load to what is contained in the text. Hence what you are doing is stroking.

Your nose precedes your face.

Keep your essence to yourself. Your sticky thoughts spring from elsewhere than that which you obfuscate in your "elucidation".


spin

Chili

The chaotic waters speak of knowledge existing in unstructured space as truth beyond beauty = reality. Ie, knowledge 'is' and exist for us to discover. Dry ground speaks of the mind that is observant of this truth to which order must be given to enable collection and recollection by the craftsman in the image of "like-god." Like-god is our ego consciousness that is required to enhance the reality (beauty and truth) that is retained by Lord God (existence) who is the earthly representation of God. But knowledge is ethereal and therefore is the "I said" of God the essence (the mist) needed for inspiration to be collected by like-god (small g), and tied to the waters of knowledge retained by Lord God that increases the collected pool of omniscience available for recollection by "like god" (ego) in future generations (and civilization at large because we learn from each other = is one God and we are its servants).

The order: God said, Lord God formed, and like-god contributed is correct but it makes us co-creators with God and potentially God through consolidation.

In the end this makes it possible for a civilization to prosper and is the cause for the rise and fall of civilizations.

Chili

It is called induction and that should be allowed to elucidate the beauty of the text. Without that you are already stuck at Gen.1:1 since there is only one heaven opposite to earth.