• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Uncanonized Books

sooda

Veteran Member
I recommend learning to use the reply button. It isn't hard.

The Jewish book of Enoch is in my library of sacred texts. What it isn't in, is the Jewish cannon. The only texts in the Jewish Biblical cannon are those that are part of the Tanach. That means, the Book of Enoch is considered a Rabbinic text, rather than a Biblical one.


I think you're setting up a portrayal here that isn't based on reality.


The thing is - and I believe I made that clear in a previous post - there is no prohibition involved here and Judaism hasn't "abandoned" the book of Enoch. We still have it and it has been quoted by Rabbis over the ages.


Considering the above, it's hard to take this [or you at this point] seriously.


Similar to ben Sirach, Enoch isn't considered a vital text in any form of Judaism. It is an interesting text, that's true. It is a Jewish text, that is also true. But it isn't a text vital to Judaism. It's possible to live a completely Jewish life without having ever opened the book.


The citation is correct in that in contains most of the words that Midrash Rabbah uses. But it is incorrect in the way it portrays the recording as a stand alone passage, when its in fact a paraphrase of a discussion that takes place in the Jerusalem Talmud (which you have incorrectly understood as your understanding is based solely on the passage in the Midrash Rabbah). It's also incorrect in that it leads one to think that the Rabbi is saying something different than what he actually is saying.

Your previous citation was not of the opinion of Rabbi Yonah in the name Rabbi Levi, but of bar Kappara. You are either confusing the opinions, or changing your own.


Judging by your repeated assertion as to the nature of the prohibition, I'm guessing that there's an agenda here that requires you to believe that Judaism takes this particular stance, despite my proof to the contrary. So I'm really just posting this for others.

This is not a Mishnah, but a quote from Midrash Rabbah. The point made there is not why may one not inquire about pre-Adamic history. It is permissible to inquire about pre-Adamic history. The passage begins by asking

Why was the world created with [the letter] beth?​

The question refers to the first letter of the Book of Genesis, Berei****h. It is essentially asking, what lesson may we derive from G-d's choosing to begin the Torah with the letter beth over any other letter?

From there, Rabbi Yonah explains, that it is to teach us that we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation. Not before Adam, but what happened before the word Berei****h.


The quote you are citing is again not from the Jewish Mishnah, but from the Jewish Midrash Rabbah.

What Rabbi Yosi bar Chaninah is of the opinion is that it's not respectful to speak about the world having come from tohu. He isn't speaking about the creation in general, just that particular aspect. The opinion cited directly before this one, is Rav who is of the opinion that one may not speak about the creation in order to gain honor.

No one is of the opinion that it's forbidden to inquire into the creation in general, because that would be contradicting a[n actual] Mishnah which states:
One may not expound the act of Creation and the secrets of the beginning of the world before two or more individuals;​
The implication obviously that it is permitted to do so in front of one individual. And in fact - despite your assertion - there are plenty of Jewish texts that delve into the creation.

I really don't know how you expect me to take you as anything other than a joke. Even the book your quoting from (Midrash, not Mishnah) expounds on the creation. The fact that you're unable or unwilling to accept this is really odd.


Your theories are unfounded because they are based on mistaken assumptions and understandings about what is prohibited in Judaism, as explained above [twice].


It is helpful in giving me the measure of the Christian scholar. Your data is faulty. Both in quality and quantity on this subject. As Christians are wont to do, you have chosen particular passages that you believe prove your opinion, but only because you've ignored all the other passages and texts that strongly disprove your position. So yes, I do think Christian religious historians are jumping to conclusions.

Tumah, the Book of Enoch went missing for 16 centuries until they found it in Ethiopia.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Enoch isn't old.. Look into WHEN is was written.

Hi @sooda ;

Are you referring to when the extant version of Jewish Enoch was written, or are you referring to the enochian traditions themselves? For example, while Jewish Enoch was written in approx 3rd century b.c., the traditions before Jewish Enoch was written and Enochian influences permeate much of the early literature. Also, are you saying that 300 b.c. (approx 2300) years ago is not "old" in reference to early Judao-Christian literature?

In any case Sooda, Good luck in your spiritual journey.

Clear
σινετωω
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Most scholars believe that these five sections were originally independent works.

Then they lost it for 16 centuries until it turned up in Ethiopia.
 

r2d2009

Member
One of the most interesting texts is the Apocryphal Gospel of Philip.

***

The Apocryphal (i.e. not included in the New Testament) Gospel of the Apostle Philip, a personal disciple of Jesus Christ, was found by archaeologists in 1945 in Egypt. It contains very important information imparted to Philip by Jesus Christ.

It concerns the highest meditative techniques that allow spiritual warriors to come to the Abode of God-the-Father, which Philip calls the Bridal Chamber. In the Gospel, two narration lines are interwoven: the line of sexual love between people and the line of the highest Love for God. The former is considered as a prototype of the latter.

The Gospel is written in artistic literary language and is rich in parables.

It was not known to Russian-speaking readers until now. Three previous editions published in thematic collections were made by translators who did not understand the meaning of the text. They only made attempts to translate the text “literally”, and as a result, the translations were an obscure series of words not related to each other.

The work on creating this edition was done at the request and with the help of the Author of the Gospel. The prototype of this edition of the translation is the editions [46,78]. The commentaries to the text of the Gospel are typed in small print.


* * *

1. A Hebrew makes a Hebrew, and such a person is called a proselyte. But a proselyte does not make a proselyte.
Those Who came from the Truth are as They were initially. And They beget other Men of Truth. The latter need only to be born (in It).



Proselyte is a person who recently accepted faith.
Those Who came from the Truth are Those Who came from the Abode of God-the-Father. They can lead Their disciples into this Abode, thus allowing them to be “born” in It.


2. A slave can hope only to become free. A slave cannot expect to inherit the estate of the master.
Yet a Son is not only a Son, but also a Co-owner of His Father’s estate.



A Son of God-the-Father, consubstantial with Him, is a Co-owner of His property.


3. There are those who inherit the perishable. They belong to the perishable, and thus they inherit the perishable.
Those Who inherit the Imperishable are imperishable. They become owners of both the Imperishable and the perishable.
People of the perishable inherit (really) nothing. Because what can a perishable man inherit?
If the one who leaves the body inherits the True Life, it means that such One is not dead but will live.



The One Who has attained the Father through efforts on self-development achieves the True Life after the death of the body. He or She becomes a Co-owner with the Father both of the Heavenly and of the earthly.


4. A pagan does not die because this person has not (really) lived. So, there is no point in speaking about a pagan’s death.
But those who have accepted the Truth begin to live, and there is a danger of dying for them because they live.



To die in this context means to go astray from the Path to the Father. This is a spiritual death.


5. Since the day of Christ’s incarnation, the prosperity came, the cities revived, the death moved away.

6. When we were Hebrews, each of us had only a mother. But since we became Christians, we have both the Father and mother.


In the Judaic tradition, God was called Father. And Jesus suggested to His followers that they call only God — Father, not the earthly parent.
Philip says that the true followers of Christ now have the True Father.


7. Those who sow in winter reap in summer.
The winter is the earthly, but the summer is another eon. Let us sow on the Earth in winter so that we may reap the harvest in summer!
Therefore, we should not pray to God for the winter, because the winter is followed by the summer.
But the one who tries to reap in winter will not really reap but only pluck out the sprouts.



In warm regions, people sow in winter, not in spring as it is done in cold regions.
The Greek word eons denotes spatial dimensions; among them are those called hell, paradise, the abode of the Creator.
In “winter”, i.e. while we are on the Earth, we have to work in order that in “summer” we live in sufficiency and bliss of the highest eons.



8. The one who does not follow this — will not reap the harvest. Moreover, such one will not only be without the harvest, but will have no strength in the Sabbath.


The one who does not work hard to make oneself better during the entire incarnation will not receive good fruits after it.
Philip symbolizes the period of time allocated for this work with the images of “winter” and “workweek”; then the time for rest comes — “summer”, “Sabbath-Saturday” (Saturday is the Jewish day of rest).



9. Christ came to “ransom” some: to liberate, to save. He “ransomed” strangers making them His own.
Afterwards, He set apart His own — those whom He ransomed by His will.
He laid down Himself (on the Path of sacrificial service) when He Himself willed it — not only when He revealed Himself to people, but from the very day of the Creation of the World, He laid down Himself.
He was embodied, and afterwards He — when He willed — withdrew Himself. He was in the hands of robbers and was taken captive. He liberated Himself and saved also those who were regarded as good and bad in this world.

-------------------

it is not end...
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @Tumah


Tumah said : "The Jewish book of Enoch is in my library of sacred texts. What it isn't in, is the Jewish cannon."
Clear replied : I agree. That was my point as well. It is in your personal library in your home, but it is not in your "canon" of sacred texts.

1) REGARDING THE LANGUAGE OF THE JEWISH PROHIBITION
Clear said to a poster : "While I agree that LATER rabbinic Judaism abandoned such early histories because of the Jewish prohibition (and thus such literature would no longer “qualify”), still, the later prohibition of early Jewish traditions left the later various forms of rabbinic Judaism bereft of knowledge which would have been helpful to them and which was helpful to the early Christian religion (which inherited much of their theology from the early Jewish religions)."
Tumah replied : The thing is - and I believe I made that clear in a previous post - there is no prohibition involved here...

Clear replied : The Jewish rabbinic prohibition is : “Just as a bet is closed on all sides and open in the front, so you are not permitted to say, "What is beneath? What is above? What came before? What will come after?"…”
“From the moment God created them you may speculate, however
you may not speculate on what was before that
“….on this you may speculate and investigate, but
you may not speculate and investigate 0n what was before


Tumah, the very words “you are not permitted…”, “you may not speculate”,… “you may not speculate and investigate…” ARE prohibitions, And I believe I made that clear to you as well.


2) IS LESS HISTORICAL DATA REALLY BETTER THAN MORE HISTORICAL DATA?
Because of this prohibition of early Rabbinic Judaism, Clear said : To the extent that the Jews excluded early data, Jesus’ specific criticism of the teachers of the Jews of his time on this point was correct. Historians will all tell you that the larger the stream of historical data, the great the accumulation of historical knowledge.
Tumah replied : " Considering the above, it's hard to take this [or you at this point] seriously."
Clear replied : "Your criticism of larger data streams in favor of smaller data streams in the accumulation of historical knowledge make it even harder to believe you know much about accumulation of historical data." Less historical data is NOT better than more historical data in making historical theories.


3) ENOCH IS NOT A "VITAL TEXT" IN TUMAHS JUDAISM
Tumah said : Similar to ben Sirach, Enoch isn't considered a vital text in any form of Judaism. It is an interesting text, that's true. It is a Jewish text, that is also true. But it isn't a text vital to Judaism. It's possible to live a completely Jewish life without having ever opened the book.
Clear responded : I very much agree with you on that your modern Judaism does not consider Enoch a "vital text".


4) TUMAH CORRECTS CLEARS "MISHNA" VS "MIDRASH" QUOTE

Clear said : The larger quote from Jewish Mishna is : ...The rabbinic justification that one is not allowed to inquire about pre-adamic history “because” the hebrew letter “beit” is open in the “forward” direction is irrational and illogical, thus it is suspected that an entirely different reason for Rabbis to prohibit inquiry and study must be assumed. Also, whether the prohibition prohibited rabbinic Jews from inquires into what happened before Creation of the earth or creation of Adam, each of the two prohibitions still has the exact same effect that I mentioned. Later rabbinic Judaism would have lost all such knowledge and traditions within a single generation….While Rabbi Yonah offers this prohibition as meaning “since God created humanity”,
Tumah replied : This is not a Mishnah, but a quote from Midrash Rabbah.

Clear replied : Thank you for this correction Tumah.


5) TUMAH ATTEMPTS TO EXPLAIN THE RABBINIC PROHIBITION
Tumah explains the area of knowledge involved in the Jewish Prohibition of knowledge
tumah said : Rabbi Yonah explains, that it is to teach us that we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation. Not before Adam, but what happened before the word Berei****h.

Clear responded
First, thank you for finally admitting the prohibition that there is something you "may not inquire" about. This is a prohibition.
Secondly, Since Berei****h (“in the beginning”) IS the first word in the first sentence in the first Book of the Old Testament, it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation. Look at the sentence in Genesis. Then read the sentence you just offered us (in red above). Think logically what that means..... "prohibition of inquiry before creation."


6) TUMAH CONFIRMS JEWS BELIEF THAT IT WAS DISRESPECTFUL TO SPEAK OF THE EARTHS CREATION (thus revealing another reason for the prohibition).
Clear said : this is not the only context for prohibition of inquiry. For example, there are other, similar prohibitions.
For example : Another prohibition regarding creation itself, or the explanation of the prohibition concerning inquiry is given by R Chaina in the Mishna.
Rabbi Yossi Bar Chaina explains that the reason one is not to inquire about the creation of the world itself, is because it was made from Chaotic material that he compares to a “trash dump” (sewers, dunghills, and garbage” are his words). And it was seen as “disrespectful” such that no one is to remind this King about what sort of "degrading" place his palace was built upon. To do so, would both “discredit” the creation and it would dishonor the king who built it. The quote I am speaking of from Jewish Mishna is as follows :

Tumah responded : "What Rabbi Yosi bar Chaninah is of the opinion is that it's not respectful to speak about the world having come from tohu. He isn't speaking about the creation in general, just that particular aspect. The opinion cited directly before this one, is Rav who is of the opinion that one may not speak about the creation in order to gain honor. No one is of the opinion that it's forbidden to inquire into the creation in general, because that would be contradicting a[n actual] Mishnah…

Clear responds : You DO realize that your admissions simply confirm that Rabbinic Judaism did not want to talk about aspects of creation because they taught it was disrespectful to talk about the earth being made of "sewers, dunghills and garbage...etc). don't you? So, you claim One can talk about what the earth is made of, as long as one doesn't talk about what the earth is made of..."

And you try to criticize Christian Historians???


7) WHAT DOES TUMAHS' JUDAISM SPECULATE REGARDING "TOHU" (OR THE GARBAGE RABBINIC JUDAISM TAUGHT THE WORLD WAS MADE OF....)
I actually applaud YOUR attitude since you seem to indicate that your type of Judaism allows speculations and studies about pre-creation conditions such as what God was doing before creating, the various creations before this one, the origin of angelic and other spirits, the nature of Satan and his origin, the reason God came up with the plan to create the worlds and to populate them, etc. This is a GOOD type of Judaism as opposed to the Judaism that prohibits such studies.

Tumah : WHAT DOES YOUR Judaism say about the origin, type and use of "Tohu" and it's nature and how it was used to create the earth?


8) ARE THE WORDS, "YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED" OR "YOU MAY NOT" A PROHIBITION?
Clear said : The Rabbinic justification given for this first prohibition against study of pre-adamic creation and inquiry is Irrational and illogical. It is quite silly to suggest that the shape of the letter “beit” is open on the front and not the back, and therefore the Jews cannot look backwards (beyond creation). The fact that this justification is so bizzare suggests that there is another real reason the rabbis did not want the Jews to inquire into this knowledge.

One better theory is that the rabbis of rabbinic Judaism created this rule in the post exilic period for a safeguard against Idolotry. Some Jews saw the Babylonian exile as a punishment (partly) because Israel had worshiped other Gods. The early Jewish texts speak of other beings who were glorified and powerful and directed by God in the processes of creation. Such early texts were quite consistent with the Christian claim regarding Jesus as the Messiah. It makes sense for post exilic rabbis to attempt to stamp out any possibility of worship they deemed inappropriate by prohibiting inquiries into the such early Jewish histories.

IF this was the actual reason for a rabbinic prohibition of such inquiry and study, then I think the Rabbis thought they were doing the “right thing” by prohibiting knowledge of such things. However, in this case, any benefit of a prohibition of study of early Jewish traditions did not outweigh the harm of ignorance of and loss of early Jewish traditions.

Of course the various Judaisms did not agree on doctrines and the early Jewish textual traditions were different than the later rabbinic Judaism. This also would be a powerful motive for rabbinic Judaism to prohibit study of conflicting doctrines.

Tumah responded : Your theories are unfounded because they are based on mistaken assumptions and understandings about what is prohibited in Judaism, as explained above [twice].

Clear responds : And I have explained to you (at least twice) and proven to you and readers that the words “you are not permitted to say,… What came before? "…”; “From the moment God created them you may speculate, however you may not speculate on what was before that” and “… you may not speculate and investigate 0n what was beforeARE prohibitions.

Perhaps you are not as knowledgeable about these things as you claim?


9) REGARDING SCHOLARS JUMPING TO HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
Tumah said : "I do think Christian religious historians are jumping to conclusions."
Clear responded : And I believe that Jewish scholars who speculate simply because the letter Beyts' shape is “closed on all sides and open in the front open in the forward direction” and therefore conclude that their adherents should only look to the time period AFTER the letter “beyt” appears in the bible are are being plain ignorant, illogical and irrational in their own “jumping to conclusions”.

For example, The Jewish rabbinic teaching is that Adam had both types of sex organs and therefore did not need Eve to procreate. THAT sort of Jewish doctrine IS “jumping to conclusions” and it is based on far, far, less data than Christian scholars who do not depend upon the shape of a letter or a two word phrase to come to their conclusions.

And you criticize Christian historians for wanting to look at “larger streams of historical data”? Really?

You are not helping your case by making further unusual and strange claims Tumah


Clear
ακακφιω
 
Last edited:

Tumah

Veteran Member
Hi First, thank you for finally admitting the prohibition that there is something you "[COLOR=rgb(255, 0, 0)][I]may not inquire[/I][/COLOR]" about. This is a prohibition.
Secondly, Since Berei****h (“in the beginning”) [B][I][U]IS[/U][/I][/B] the [B][I][U]first[/U][/I][/B] word in the [B][I][U]first[/U][/I][/B] sentence in the [B][I][U]first[/U][/I][/B] Book of the Old Testament, it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation. Look at the sentence in Genesis. Then read the sentence you just offered us (in red above). Think logically what that means..... "prohibition of inquiry [I]before[/I] creation."


Clear responds : You DO realize that your admissions simply [I]confirm[/I] that Rabbinic Judaism did not want to talk about aspects of creation because they taught it was disrespectful to talk about the earth being made of "sewers, dunghills and garbage...etc). don't you? So, you claim One[I][COLOR=#4d4dff] can talk about what the earth is made of, as long as one doesn't talk about what the earth is made of...[/COLOR][/I]"

And you try to criticize Christian Historians???


7) WHAT DOES TUMAHS' JUDAISM SPECULATE REGARDING "TOHU" (OR THE GARBAGE RABBINIC JUDAISM TAUGHT THE WORLD WAS MADE OF....)
I actually applaud YOUR attitude since you seem to indicate that your type of Judaism allows speculations and studies about pre-creation conditions such as what God was doing before creating, the various creations before this one, the origin of angelic and other spirits, the nature of Satan and his origin, the reason God came up with the plan to create the worlds and to populate them, etc. This is a GOOD type of Judaism as opposed to the Judaism that prohibits such studies.

Tumah : WHAT DOES YOUR Judaism say about the origin, type and use of "Tohu" and it's nature and how it was used to create the earth?

Clear responds : And I have explained to you (at least twice) and proven to you and readers that the words “[COLOR=rgb(89, 0, 179)]…[/COLOR][I][COLOR=#0000ff][B]you are not permitted[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=#5900b3] to say,… What came before? "…”; “From the moment God created them you may speculate, however [/COLOR][COLOR=#0000ff][B]you may not speculate[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=#5900b3] on what was before that” and “… [/COLOR][COLOR=#0000ff][B]you may not speculate and investigate[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=#5900b3] 0n what was before[/COLOR][/I] “ [B]ARE prohibitions[/B].

Perhaps you are not as knowledgeable about these things as you claim?


9) REGARDING SCHOLARS JUMPING TO HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
[COLOR=#ff0000][I]Tumah said : "I do think Christian religious historians are jumping to conclusions."[/I][/COLOR]
Clear responded : And I believe that Jewish scholars who speculate simply because the letter Beyts' shape is “[I]closed on all sides and open in the front[/I] open in the forward direction” and therefore conclude that their adherents should only look to the time period AFTER the letter “beyt” appears in the bible are are being plain ignorant, illogical and irrational in their own “jumping to conclusions”.

For example, The Jewish rabbinic teaching is that Adam had both types of sex organs and therefore did not need Eve to procreate. THAT sort of Jewish doctrine IS “jumping to conclusions” and it is based on far, far, less data than Christian scholars who do not depend upon the shape of a letter or a two word phrase to come to their conclusions.

And you criticize Christian historians for wanting to look at “larger streams of historical data”? Really?

You are not helping your case by making further unusual and strange claims Tumah


Clear
ακακφιω

Go ahead and read just your responses that I've isolated here. You'll notice that you've admitted that Rabbinic prohibition is isolated to [I]the things that happened before the first word of the first verse of the Genesis [/I]- a time period which precedes the creation of Adam and tohu- and also argued that Rabbinic prohibition is about things that occurred during the creation.

When you figure out what you're argument is, feel free to get back to me.

And yes, I'll happily criticize Christian historians.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @Tumah

1) REGARDING CLEARS POST THAT THE RABBINIC PROHIBITION REFERS TO THINGS THAT HAPPENED BEFORE CREATION
Clear Claimed in Post #19 : Regarding Deut 4:32 : “The rabbinic Jews interpreted this scripture as a prohibition of inquiry regarding periods of time BEFORE God created the earth.”
Tumah said in Post #21 “Sorry this is wrong.” and then explained in post #40 “...we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation….what happened before the word Berei****h.”
Clear replied in post #47 : “Since Berei****h (“in the beginning”) IS the first word in the first sentence in the first Book of the Old Testament, it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation..”
Tumah replied : "You'll notice that you've admitted that Rabbinic prohibition is isolated to the things that happened before the first word in the first verse of Genesis - a time period which precedes the creation of Adam and tohu...."


Ooookaaaay......

The logic of your argument is truly amazing.....

So..... We now BOTH agree on my initial point (post #19) that The rabbinic Jews prohibition regards “The periods of time BEFORE Creation”.

This is good.



2) THE QUESTION CLEAR ASKED TUMAH REMAINS UNANSWERED
@Tumah, you forgot to answer my question :

WHAT DOES YOUR modern personal version of Judaism say about the origin, type and use of "Tohu" and it's nature and how it was used to create the earth?


Clear
νεεινεω
 

Tumah

Veteran Member

Now? Don't blame me if your reading comprehension is low. But [URL='https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/the-uncanonized-books.215746/page-2#post-6169657']here's my first post[/URL] on this thread to you:
[INDENT]
Similarly, your citation from sacred-texts is wrong. The prohibition is not against studying what happened before G-d created man on earth - and that's not what Gen. Rabbah says either. The author misunderstood the Midrash, only quoted half of the statement from the particular Rabbi and was unaware that the passage is actually a paraphrase of a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud. [B]The prohibition is from before the [/B][I]first day [/I][B]of creation.[/B] In Jewish sources angels are created after the first day of creation.[/INDENT]



[U][quote]2) THE QUESTION CLEAR ASKED TUMAH REMAINS UNANSWERED[/quote][/U][quote]
[USER=51255]@Tumah
, you forgot to answer my question :

WHAT DOES YOUR modern personal version of Judaism say about the origin, type and use of "Tohu" and it's nature and how it was used to create the earth?


Clear
νεεινεω[/QUOTE]
The Talmud calls it a green line out of which darkness comes and quotes Psa. 18:12 and Isa. 34:11. However, based on it's own directive the Talmud tends to veil itself when it comes to the Creation narrative, so it's not clear what it's referring to.

It's clear that tohu refers to a state of desolation, per Deut. 32:10 and Isa. 40:17.

Later sources identify tohu with hyle and bohu with morphe, or tohu with a sort of negative hyle out of which bohu the positive hyle is created.
It's also understood to refer to the destruction of previously created worlds out of which our world was created (and this doesn't necessarily contradict the previous explanation).[/user]
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
1) REGARDING CLEARS POST THAT THE RABBINIC PROHIBITION REFERS TO THINGS THAT HAPPENED BEFORE CREATION
Clear Claimed in Post #19 : Regarding Deut 4:32 : “The rabbinic Jews interpreted this scripture as a prohibition of inquiry regarding periods of time BEFORE God created the earth.”
Tumah said in Post #21 “Sorry this is wrong.” and then explained in post #40 “...we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation….what happened before the word Berei****h.”
Clear replied in post #47 : “Since Berei****h (“in the beginning”) IS the first word in the first sentence in the first Book of the Old Testament, it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation..”
Tumah replied : "You'll notice that you've admitted that Rabbinic prohibition is isolated to the things that happened before the first word in the first verse of Genesis - a time period which precedes the creation of Adam and tohu...."
Clear replied : Ooookaaaay...... The logic of your argument is truly amazing.....
So..... We now BOTH agree on my initial point (post #19) that The rabbinic Jews prohibition regards “The periods of time BEFORE Creation”. (Post #40)

Tuma re-re-re clarifies that he actually meant : “The prohibition is from before the first day of creation. “ (post #50)


Forum Readers :
I do not particularly care about semantics we use. “Before God created”, “before the creation” “Before creation”, “time period which precedes the creation”, “from before the first day of creation”. They are all fine with me.

My original point is that the later Jews who obeyed the rabbinic prohibition against learning about “pre-creation” knowledge, then would become ignorant about these specific traditions and doctrines. Jews prohibited from learning about these traditions and doctrines Jews would not have tended to keep books dealing with areas of knowledge they were prohibited from reading or inquiring about. The ignorant Jews which were obedient to the Rabbinic prohibition would not have been able to pass on knowledge which they, themselves, did not possess.


@Tumah
Regarding Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form (tohu) and void (Bohu) …"
You mentioned regarding the characteristic of the material out of which the world was created (“tohu”), “The Talmud calls it a green line out of which darkness comes”. (Tumah, Post #50)

WHAT in the world does that possibly mean? “A green line”?? Think about the type of ignorance from which one concludes that “Tohu” (αορατος or υλη in lxx) is a “green line out of which darkness comes.”

Consider the situation rabbinic ignorance of this time period and it conditions causes :

You indicate the Talmud uses Psa 18:12 and Isa 34:11.

Psalms 18:12 “At the brightness before him his thick clouds passed by hail and coals of fire.
So, these rabbis conclude that “tohu” meant “A green line”….. by using this verse? Talk about jumping to illogical, irrational conclusions.

Oops, wait. They used Isaiah 34:11 as well. Lets look at Isaiah.

Isaiah 34:11 “But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion and the stones of emptiness. 12 They shall call the nobles thereof to the kingdom, but none [shall be] there, and all her princes shall be nothing….

HOW could this POSSIBLY motivate the rabbis to come to the conclusion that “tohu” meant “a green line”???? Such conclusions are LITERALLY born of ignorance and stupidity on the specific nature of tohu and the conditions existing at the time of and before creation. THIS sort of ignorance is partly a result of the Jewish rabbinic prohibition of study and learning about this time period. While you try to spin this Jewish prohibition as “.. based on it's own directive the Talmud tends to veil itself when it comes to the Creation narrative…”, the more accurate description is “ based on it's prohibition against learning of this subject, the Talmud is ignorant when it comes to the meaning of "Tohu”. The Talmudic rabbis cannot “unveil” what they do not know anything about.

I am normally not bent to sarcasm in these debates. But the hypocrisy of saying Christian Scholars jump to conclusions in the face of the absolute silliness and irrationality and illogic of Rabbinical conclusions that Psa 18:12 and Isa 34:11 means "a green line" is ignorant hubris in the extreme compared to modern scholars that seek great swaths of information and pour through genres of early texts in order to create tentative models which they invite others to modify and improve.

The famous JEWISH saying “ask two Jews and get three opinions” seems to apply to your criticism of and semantics surrounding “the things that happened before the first word in the first verse of Genesis” (“i.e. In the beginning”). Once you decide whatever word you want to use, let’s use it. I don’t mind using any word you want to use. However, WHATEVER word we use to describe the Jewish prohibition against inquiry into, against learning about, against discussion of, it STILL leaves Jews ignorant of areas of knowledge they will not learn about and are, in fact, prohibited from learning about by the ancient Rabbis. This Prohibition affected their attitude about the Book of Enoch (which speaks of pre-creation themes and the Pre-creation messiah, who the Jewish Christians and non-Jewish Christians identified as Jesus).

Clear
νεφυσεω
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
1) REGARDING CLEARS POST THAT THE RABBINIC PROHIBITION REFERS TO THINGS THAT HAPPENED BEFORE CREATION
Clear Claimed in Post #19 : Regarding Deut 4:32 : “The rabbinic Jews interpreted this scripture as a prohibition of inquiry regarding periods of time BEFORE God created the earth.”
Tumah said in Post #21 “Sorry this is wrong.” and then explained in post #40 “...we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation….what happened before the word Berei****h.”
Clear replied in post #47 : “Since Berei****h (“in the beginning”) IS the first word in the first sentence in the first Book of the Old Testament, it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation..”
Tumah replied : "You'll notice that you've admitted that Rabbinic prohibition is isolated to the things that happened before the first word in the first verse of Genesis - a time period which precedes the creation of Adam and tohu...."
Clear replied : Ooookaaaay...... The logic of your argument is truly amazing.....
So..... We now BOTH agree on my initial point (post #19) that The rabbinic Jews prohibition regards “The periods of time BEFORE Creation”. (Post #40)

Tuma re-re-re clarifies that he actually meant : “The prohibition is from before the first day of creation. “ (post #50)


Forum Readers :
I do not particularly care about semantics we use. “Before God created”, “before the creation” “Before creation”, “time period which precedes the creation”, “from before the first day of creation”. They are all fine with me.

My original point is that the later Jews who obeyed the rabbinic prohibition against learning about “pre-creation” knowledge, then would become ignorant about these specific traditions and doctrines. Jews prohibited from learning about these traditions and doctrines Jews would not have tended to keep books dealing with areas of knowledge they were prohibited from reading or inquiring about. The ignorant Jews which were obedient to the Rabbinic prohibition would not have been able to pass on knowledge which they, themselves, did not possess.
All those terms may be fine with you, but from previous posts, you seem to not realize that the period that you've been arguing we don't have traditions about took place after the start of Creation. So you're either arguing a non-issue, or you don't realize what you're arguing against.

@Tumah
Regarding Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form (tohu) and void (Bohu) …"
You mentioned regarding the characteristic of the material out of which the world was created (“tohu”), “The Talmud calls it a green line out of which darkness comes”. (Tumah, Post #50)

WHAT in the world does that possibly mean? “A green line”?? Think about the type of ignorance from which one concludes that “Tohu” (αορατος or υλη in lxx) is a “green line out of which darkness comes.”

Consider the situation rabbinic ignorance of this time period and it conditions causes :

You indicate the Talmud uses Psa 18:12 and Isa 34:11.

Psalms 18:12 “At the brightness before him his thick clouds passed by hail and coals of fire.
So, these rabbis conclude that “tohu” meant “A green line”….. by using this verse? Talk about jumping to illogical, irrational conclusions.

Oops, wait. They used Isaiah 34:11 as well. Lets look at Isaiah.

Isaiah 34:11 “But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion and the stones of emptiness. 12 They shall call the nobles thereof to the kingdom, but none [shall be] there, and all her princes shall be nothing….

HOW could this POSSIBLY motivate the rabbis to come to the conclusion that “tohu” meant “a green line”???? Such conclusions are LITERALLY born of ignorance and stupidity on the specific nature of tohu and the conditions existing at the time of and before creation. THIS sort of ignorance is partly a result of the Jewish rabbinic prohibition of study and learning about this time period. While you try to spin this Jewish prohibition as “.. based on it's own directive the Talmud tends to veil itself when it comes to the Creation narrative…”, the more accurate description is “ based on it's prohibition against learning of this subject, the Talmud is ignorant when it comes to the meaning of "Tohu”. The Talmudic rabbis cannot “unveil” what they do not know anything about.

I am normally not bent to sarcasm in these debates. But the hypocrisy of saying Christian Scholars jump to conclusions in the face of the absolute silliness and irrationality and illogic of Rabbinical conclusions that Psa 18:12 and Isa 34:11 means "a green line" is ignorant hubris in the extreme compared to modern scholars that seek great swaths of information and pour through genres of early texts in order to create tentative models which they invite others to modify and improve.

The famous JEWISH saying “ask two Jews and get three opinions” seems to apply to your criticism of and semantics surrounding “the things that happened before the first word in the first verse of Genesis” (“i.e. In the beginning”). Once you decide whatever word you want to use, let’s use it. I don’t mind using any word you want to use. However, WHATEVER word we use to describe the Jewish prohibition against inquiry into, against learning about, against discussion of, it STILL leaves Jews ignorant of areas of knowledge they will not learn about and are, in fact, prohibited from learning about by the ancient Rabbis. This Prohibition affected their attitude about the Book of Enoch (which speaks of pre-creation themes and the Pre-creation messiah, who the Jewish Christians and non-Jewish Christians identified as Jesus).

Clear
νεφυσεω
Can you explain to me what a green line out of which comes darkness means?

While you try to spin this Jewish prohibition as “.. based on it's own directive the Talmud tends to veil itself when it comes to the Creation narrative…”, the more accurate description is “ based on it's prohibition against learning of this subject, the Talmud is ignorant when it comes to the meaning of "Tohu”. The Talmudic rabbis cannot “unveil” what they do not know anything about.
No, and again, I've mentioned a number of times already, there is no prohibition to learn this subject. This is a subject that takes place after the start of Creation.
The problem is the Mishnah (the real one, not the one you keep quoting that's really Midrash) forbids teaching the secrets of the Creation account to more than two people at a time (which again implies that it's not prohibited to learn). Since the Talmud was written for the public (public = more than two people), but it also has to pass on these traditions, is does so by veiling it's meaning. On these subjects it can be quite cryptic.

The truth is, I've already explained all this to you a few times, but you keep ... I don't know... ignoring it? no understanding that your conception is wrong? not reading what I'm writing? I really don't know. But honestly, unless you're trying to show yourself to be a fool, you're doing a terrible job.

So for the third time in this post alone:
THERE IS NO PROHIBITION TO STUDY THE THINGS THAT OCCURRED FROM THE TIME CREATION BEGAN.
BEFORE CREATION BEGAN THERE EXISTED NOTHING.
EVERYTHING THAT EXISTED NECESSARILY WERE CREATED AFTER CREATION STARTED AND ARE PERMITTED TO LEARN.
EVERYTHING.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
1) PRE-CREATION TIME PERIOD IS NOT THE SAME AS CREATION OR POST-CREATION TIME PERIODS

Tumah said : "the Mishnah....forbids teaching the secrets of the Creation account to more than two people at a time..." post #52

Tumah, you are confused. We are NOT speaking of "the Creation account". We are speaking of what was happening and conditions BEFORE the creation account (i.e. before God created this earth....)

Clear in Post #19 : "... Periods of time BEFORE God created the earth.”
Tumah in Post #21 we may not inquire as to what happened before the Creation….”
Clear in post #47 : “it IS a prohibition against inquiry as to what happened before creation. ….”
Tumah replied : " a time period which precedes the creation of Adam and tohu...."
Clear post #40 "The periods of time BEFORE Creation”. (Post #40)
Tumah Post #50 The prohibition is from before the first day of creation. “ (post #50)



2) DIFFERENT RELIGIONS CALLED “JUDAISM”. – SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EARLY JUDAISMS AND LATER RABBINIC JUDAISMS

Tumah says modern of Rabbinic Jewish religion believes : "BEFORE CREATION BEGAN THERE EXISTED NOTHING."

This religion is different than the early Judaism and their religion describes in early Jewish Epigraphs In such early Judaism many things existed before the actual creation of this material earth.
In the early Jewish texts such as Enoch, God existed, spirits of mankind existed, spirits of angels existed, the Messiah existed, Matter (out of which the earth was made) existed AND much was going on during this time period.

Thus Tumah is demonstrating the very point I was trying to make regarding ANY prohibition of certain areas of historical knowledge and the value of LARGER historical data streams rather than cutting off data streams (or using smaller streams of historical data). By pointing out that his later rabbinic Judaic movement does not know of anything existing before creation of the earth, this demonstrates the state of ignorance which prohibition of knowledge and data will leave its’ adherents in.

In the earlier Jewish movements represented by the Enochian literature (which inspired this disagreement regarding the Jewish prohibition and thus the loss of use of Enochian literature) GOD existed, spirits of mankind existed, even the Jewish legends tell us this earth was not the first, but hundreds existed before this one, the early descriptions of the chosing of the Messiah are in this genre of literature which was prohibited by the Jewish Rabbis.

Such doctrinal differences between the early Judaisms described in early texts such as Enoch was one of the reasons some later Jewish movements such as the rabbinic jewish movement would not have found enochian literature comfortable and thus it fell into disuse among the rabbinic movement and found more favor among the Christians who were not prohibited from such inquiry and knowledge.

Clear
ειτζτζδρω
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
POST ONE OF FOUR

The consequence of loss of early Jewish and early Christian literature and early beliefs.

I simply wanted to give you an example of WHY the early Judeo-Christian doctrines with their knowledge of pre-existence were more rational and coherent and superior (IMO) to those of the many later Jewish and Christian Movements.

Early Christian traditions, doctrines, and practices are vast, interrelated, coherent, and provide insight and relevance to authentic religion

We have, so far, simply discussed a very small portion of the vast early Jewish and Christian literature having to do with the pre-creation time period. The Genre in early Judeo-Christian literature is actually quite large and consequential. Part of the reason the literature is not so widely known in the various modern Jewish religions is due to a prohibition in Rabbinic Judaism (the predominant type) from inquiry into and a study of pre-creation. However, the philosophical and doctrinal consequences of the abandonment of such early doctrines is important since it left the later iterations and versions of Christian movements in a state of relative ignorance on important subjects.

I mentioned, as an example the problem of the origin of Evil and the continued allowance of suffering by an omnipotent God within the Christian context have been debated for almost 2 millennia. Many of these philosophical questions are clarified by a return to early historical religious texts that describe what was happening in the pre-creation periods. For example :


In response to an inquiry as to the origin of Satan, I saw a comment from a Christian who was explaining to an investigator of Christianity, the origin of Satan as a source of evil in God’s creation. The christian commented :

“...there's nothing, scripturally speaking, that addresses the question of the origin of evil (or Satan, if you prefer). The only hint is in Genesis 3 where the serpent (in later tradition -- again without scriptural support -- identified as the devil) appears quite suddenly as part of an apparently very good creation. Nary a word of comment on the origins of this creature.... “

That’s it, in toto. The Rabbinic Jewish framework is not particularly better since they prohibited such inquiries and studies and thus the concepts that would accompany such studies. This lack of a framework for understanding the basic issues surrounding what is going on with all of this “good” and “evil” that none of us avoid inside of creation; and demonstrate the value of turning to the earliest Christian teachings and their writings on such issues.

There is a great deal of early literature regarding what the early Jews and christians themselves believed regarding the Origin and motives of Lucifer (his “name” before he became “satan” or the “devil”...)

I think it is an important historical context to keep in mind that Lucifer’s “fall” did not happen suddenly nor in a contextual vacuum. That is, the “good” Archangel Lucifer did didn't simply wake up in a bad mood and decide to be “evil” one morning. But instead, Lucifers fall was more logical and it occurred in the context of several frustrating controversies, (some more important than others).

Though Historians are aware of other controversies, the most famous controversy in the ancient texts occurred during the honoring of Adam which itself takes place in the greater context of God the Fathers Plan.

The “Fall” of Lucifer from angel in power to an enemy of God and the rest of mankind.

In this early Judeo-Christian model :

1) The spirits of angels, mankind and God existed prior to mortality

2) God the Father’s plan entailed moral advancement of the spirits of men and Adam was to be the First of mankind

3) The Honoring of Adam was logical in view of his role in God’s plan for mankind

4) Lucifer’s “rebellion” was more than a refusal to “honor Adam”.

5) Lucifer’s “punishment” relates to his rebellion against the plan AND God himself

6) Lucifer’s current “dominion” plays a “role” in God’s ultimate plan



Without considering conditions PRIOR to Lucifer’s rebellion, then the rebellion cannot be understood as the ancient Christians (who wrote the texts) understood it. Without considering the nature of the rebellion, then Lucifer’s punishment and his current dominion cannot be understood as the ancient Christians understood and taught such doctrines



A) GOD THE FATHER’S PLAN FOR MAN, (WHICH LUCIFER ULTIMATELY REBELS AGAINST)

Long before the creation of this world, God was in the midst of spirits. Early textual testimonies describe innumerable spirits existing in “heaven” before creation and, they describe what God intended to do with these innumerable spirits.

Regarding his vision of pre-creation heaven, Enoch records : "No one could come near unto him [God the Father] from among those that surrounded the tens of millions (that stood) before him". (1 En 14:23). Enoch continues : Quote: "I saw a hundred thousand times a hundred thousand, ten million times ten million, an innumerable and uncountable (multitude) who stand before the glory of the Lord of the Spirits". (1 Enoch 40:1-2)"

At the time that the Holy One, be blessed, was about to create the world, he decided to fashion all the souls which would in due course be dealt out to the children of men, .... Scrutinizing each, he saw that among them some would fall into evil ways in the world. Each one in it’s due time the Holy One, be blessed, bade come to him, and then said: “Go now, descend into this that this place, into this and this body.” (The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul) God was in the midst of spirits of all the spirits who ever lived or will live on this earth according to such early texts.



B) BECAUSE GOD WAS INTELLIGENT AND POSSESSED POWER AND CHARITY, HE DEVISED A PLAN SO AS TO ALLOW OTHER SPIRITS TO ADVANCE

The ancient Jewish doctrine that God had instituted a divine plan is interwoven into multiple texts : "Before all things came to be, he [God] has ordered all their designs" (Dead Sea Scrolls 4Q255-264)
Quote:....I (the Father), in the midst of the light (glory), moved around in the invisible things, like one of them, as the sun moves around from east to west and from west to east. But the sun has rest; yet I did not find rest, because everything was not yet created. And I thought up the idea of establishing a foundation, to create a visible creation." (2nd Enoch 24:4)

The Prophet Enoch describes the earliest stages of this plan before it was known among the heavenly host : "for not even to my angels have I explained my secrets, nor related to them their origin, nor my endless and inconceivable creation which I conceived." (2nd Enoch 24:3) In these descriptions of his Plan, God the Father seems to take great care in both the planning of and in ensuring the deep involvement of the Heavenly Hosts (for whose benefit the plan existed).

Though these texts tell us that all the spirits of men existed before the creation of the earth, the spirits were in no way equals (just as we are not equal now). Among them were the more intelligent and gifted; i.e. those who were more full of grace and truth than others. In addition to Lucifer, God the Father and Adam, all other key players are all present in this pre-mortal realm.

In Enoch’s vision, he also see’s the pre-mortal Jesus with the Father. Upon seeing the two together, Enoch asks who this individual (Jesus) is and what role he has in the Father's Plan :
Quote:"At that place, I saw the Beginning of days [i.e. the Father] And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels. And I asked the one – from among the angels –who was going with me,..."Who is this and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?" And he answered me and said to me, "This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells...the Lord of the spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the spirits in eternal uprightness...." (1 Enoch 46:1-4)

It is in this context that the Apostolic Father Ignatius taught that among those spirits was "Jesus...who before the ages was with the father.. (Ignatius :6:1). The ancient records show the Father and Jesus, from early on, possessed a great similarity and unity. Jesus was given greater authority and administrated much of the Father’s plan from early on (God’s "right hand" was one of the Pre-Creation Jesus’ appellations). Diogenes relates this ancient doctrine :

"And when he revealed it (his plan) through his beloved Child and made known the things prepared from the beginning, he gave us to share in his benefits and to see and understand things which none of [us] ever would have expected.. So then, having already planned everything in his mind together with his child... (Diog 301:8-11)

C) DESPITE CONCERNS, THE PLAN WAS GENERALLY, RECEIVED JOYOUSLY

Ancient pre-creation histories describe that the Father’s plan, revealed to these spirits before the foundations of the earth were laid was generally joyously received. God’s question to Job was not merely rhetorical, but was a contextual reminder to Job of an actual occurrence.

"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7)

The advancement entailed by God's plan was something the spirits wanted : Enoch says that he saw : "...the fountain of righteousness,...surrounded completely by numerous fountains of wisdom. All the thirsty ones drink (of the water) and become filled with wisdom. (Then) their dwelling places become with the holy, righteous, and elect ones.

The underlying concept is that there were other spirits who wanted to drink from that same wisdom and take their place with others who were “holy, righteous and elect”.


Jewish Zohar relates mortality to a moral education received by coming to mortality :...why do they [the spirits of mankind] descend to this world only to be taken thence [back to heaven] at some future time? “This may be explained by way of a simile: A king has a son whom he sends to a village to be educated until he shall have been initiated into the ways of the palace. When the king is informed that his son is now come to maturity, the king, out of his love, sends the matron his mother to bring him back into the palace, and there the king rejoices with him every day.....

POST TWO OF FOUR FOLLOWS
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
POST TWO OF FOUR

D) GOD’S PLAN CONTINUED TO PROGRESS

God’s plan moved forward and preparations were made over a great deal of time including a physical creation in preparation for mortality.

Though multiple creation accounts exist, the earlier Christian accounts make it clear both that God created the Planets and Stars (often translated “orbs” or “circles”) out of “lessor”, or more chaotic material, and, importantly, he commissioned the Pre-creation Jesus (Often called “the word” or his “right hand”) to administrate over this material creation of an earth which will then be populated with embodied spirits for their education and testing.

Thus the early Synagogal prayer reflects this doctrine : “We give thanks to you, O God and Father of Jesus our Savior...O Master Almighty, the God of the universe, you created the world and what is in it through him,... (Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers aposCon 7.26. 1-3 Or prayer #3 “ Blessed are you, O Lord, King of the ages, who through Christ made everything, and through him in the beginning ordered that which was unprepared” (i.e. chaotic matter) (#3 prayer That meditates upon God’s Manifold Creative Power) (aposCon 7.34.1-8) or prayer #4 that addresses God the Father : “For you are the Father of wisdom, the Creator, as cause, of the creative workmanship through a Mediator....” #4 (aposCon 7.35.1-10);


The Jewish Geninza 4Q texts are clear that, despite delegation of important roles, the plan IS the Father’s plan and that he “determined all your works before you created them, together with the host of your spirits and the assembly of your holy ones… - all your designs for the end of time..” God counsels with those whose involvement he wants, but it remains God the Father's plan : “Moreover the Holy One, blessed be he, does nothing in his world without first taking counsel with them; then he acts, as it is written” (3Enoch :4 283).

This early Jewish teaching that the physical creation was accomplished for the purpose of advancing mankind is the same tradition as the early Christians held. New Testament Hermas taught : Quote: "...don’t you understand how great and mighty and marvelous God’s glory is, because he created the world for the sake of man, and subjected all his creation to man..” (Her 47:2-4).

The physical creation of the earliest ancient accounts was accomplished by taking “lessor” or more chaotic matter, and organizing it into a “higher” or more organized and purposeful form such as the organized earth had. Old Testament Enoch describes this same process: And I called out a second time into the very lowest things, and I said, ‘Let one of the (in)visible things come out visibly, solid.’..” (2nd Enoch 26:1).

From this lesser organized, chaotic debris, the earth and other planets were formed : And thus I made solid the heavenly circles (orbs). ...And from the rocks I assembled the dry land; and I called the dry land Earth. “ (2nd Enoch 28:1-2).

And thus, in company with the Pre-Mortal spirit of Jesus (called "the word” or “the right hand” in some accounts), the Father accomplished creation. I said, “O Lord, you spoke at the beginning of creation, and said on the first day, ‘Let heaven and earth be made, ‘ and your word accomplished the work...Again, on the second day, you created the spirit of the firmament and commanded him to divide and separate the waters...On the third day you commanded the waters to be gather together...For your word went forth, and at once the work was done. “ (4th Enoch 3:38-42).

Even at this early, less sophisticated stage of existence, spirits were able to exercise their agency. Thus the spirits of men were able to exercise choice to take part in this plan despite difficulties they will experience in mortality (as Job was reminded), just as they are allowed moral choice in this life.

Given the grandeur and the pure intent and profound implications of God’s plan for mankind, it may start to make some sense of what it meant for Lucifer, not only to refuse to take part in the plan, but to openly rebel against the plan, and ultimately rebel against God the Father himself.

THE EARLY TEXTUAL CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS MAKES CLEAR THAT, IT IS PARTLY BECAUSE OF THE HONOR DUE ADAM AND HIS ROLE IN INAUGURATING THE FATHERS' PLAN THAT HE WAS CREATED IN THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF HIS GOD. AND IT WAS PARTLY BECAUSE HE WAS CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF THE LORD GOD THAT SPIRITS, ANGELS AND ALL OTHERS WERE COMMANDED BY THE LORD GOD TO HONOR ADAM, WHO WAS CREATED IN GOD'S OWN IMAGE. These other doctrines and traditions do not stand apart from the doctrine that adam was created in God's image, but many other prominent doctrines DEPEND UPON and draw from this first doctrine. Many such doctrines have interconnections.


E) LUCIFER’S REFUSAL TO HONOR ADAM WAS AN ORTHODOX TEACHING IN EARLY CHRISTIAN RELIGION

Regarding my references to Lucifer’s refusal to honor Adam. It is important to me that readers understand that I did not simply pick out a single “obscure” reference describing this story. Rather, this early doctrine was taught is described in many texts over a great deal of time and space.

For examples: Sedrach relates : “You commanded your angels to honor Adam, but he who was first among the angels disobeyed your order and did not honor him: and so you banished him because he transgressed your commandment and did not come forth (to honor) the creation of your hands." (The Apocalypse of Sedrach 5:1-7)

The Christian text “Life of Adam and Eve” relates the same incident : Speaking to Adam, the Devil said :...because of you I am expelled and deprived of my glory which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and because of you I was cast out onto the earth.” 2 Adam answered, “What have I done to you, and what is my blame with you? Ch 13 “The devil replied,...It is because of you that I have been thrown out of there. 2 When .......Michael brought you and made (us) honor you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ Ch 14 3 And I answered, ‘I do not honor Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ 15 1 When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to honor him. (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3; 16:1-3)

The early Christian Text “Cave of Treasures” relates :And when the prince of the lower order of angels saw what great majesty had been given unto Adam, he was jealous of him from that day, and he did not wish to honor him. And he said unto his hosts, "Ye shall not honor him, and ye shall not praise him with the angels. It is meet that ye should worship me, because I am fire and spirit; and not that I should worship a thing of dust, which hath been fashioned of fine dust."

Jewish Enoch relates, in the context of this Lucifer’s rebellion :the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it. ....And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam. (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1)

Jewish Haggadah (having Talmudic origins) also relates : The extraordinary qualities with which Adam was blessed, physical and spiritual as well, aroused the envy of the angels...After Adam had been endowed with a soul, God invited all the angels to come and pay him reverence and homage. Satan, the greatest of the angels in heaven,....refused to pay heed to the behest of God, saying, “You created us angels from the splendor of the Shekinah, and now you command us to cast ourselves down before the creature which you fashioned out of the dust of the ground!” God answered, “Yet this dust of the ground has more wisdom and understanding than you.”... (The Haggadah -The Fall of Satan)

The text then relates the "battle of wits" between Lucifers spirit and Adam's spirit where Lucifer is bested and loses "face".

Christian Bartholomew also confirms the story as Lucifer says : And when I came from the ends of the world, Michael said to me: ‘Honor the image of God which he has made in his own likeness.’ But I said: ‘I am fire of fire. I was the first angel to be formed, and shall I worship clay and matter?” And Michael said to me: ‘Honor [him], lest god be angry with you.’ I answered: ‘God will not be angry with me, but I will set up my throne over against his throne, and shall be as he is [Isa. 14:14f]. ‘ then god was angry with me and cast me down,... (The Gospel of Bartholomew Ch IV)

This doctrinal controversy is not simply Jewish and Christian in it’s nature, but it’s also ISLAMIC, as confirmed by the Sixth Century Holy Quran text :

"..And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "I am going to create a man (Adam) from sounding clay of altered black smooth mud. So, when I have fashioned him completely and breathed into him (Adam) the soul which I created for him, then fall (you) down prostrating yourselves unto him." So, the angels prostrated themselves, all of them together. Except Iblis (Satan), - he refused to be among the prostrators. (Sura 15:28-31)

In Sura 20 :And (remember) when We said to the angels: "Prostrate yourselves to Adam." They prostrated (all) except Iblis (Satan), who refused. (Sura 20:116)

In Sura 38 : (Remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Truly, I am going to create man from clay". So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by Me, then you fall down prostrate to him." So the angels prostrated themselves, all of them: Except Iblis (Satan) he was proud and was one of the disbelievers. (Sura 38:71-74)

In Sura 7 : And surely, We created you (your father Adam) and then gave you shape (the noble shape of a human being), then We told the angels, "Prostrate to Adam", and they prostrated, except Iblis (Satan), he refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented you (O Iblis) that you did not prostrate, when I commanded you?" Iblis said: "I am better than him (Adam), You created me from fire, and him You created from clay." (Sura 7:11-12)

In Sura 18 :“And (remember) when We said to the angels; "Prostrate to Adam." So they prostrated except Iblis (Satan). He was one of the jinns; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord.... (Sura 18:50)

POST THREE OF FOUR FOLLOWS
 
Last edited:

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
POST THREE OF FOUR

The point in repeating this doctrine from so many different ancient sources such as ancient Jewish literature, ancient Christian literature and ancient Islamic Literature and from multiple versions is to show that this specific controversy and it’s relation to the doctrine of the “Origin” of Satan, is VERY ancient, the doctrine is VERY widespread among a large group of ancient literature, and the doctrine is VERY “orthodox” to the ancient Christians and other religious groups as well.

F) THE HONOR DUE ADAM WAS PERFECTLY LOGICAL IN VIEW OF ADAM'S IMPORTANT ROLE IN GOD THE FATHER'S PLAN

It ought to be perfectly clear that as milestones were reached in the moving forward of God’s Plan for the spirits of mankind, the inauguration of mortality was an incredibly important phase that all spirits had long been anticipating. Thus, the “honoring of Adam” was not simply an arbitrary and spontaneous “office party” thrown at a whim, but it was a recognition of the culmination of organization and creation over a great deal of time and the inauguration of the opening phase of mortality of all mankind..


G) THE NATURE OF LUCIFER’S REFELLION IN THE CONTEXT OF GOD THE FATHER’S PLAN.

The nature of Lucifer’s punishment indicates the seriousness of what he did : When Enoch tells the fallen angel Azaz’el that “There will not be peace unto you; a grave judgment has come upon you. They will put you in bonds because you have taught injustice (1st Enoch 13:1-3), Enoch is not speaking of mere “naughtiness” or mere “disagreement” with God’s plan. Such fallen angels were told judgment is passed upon you. 5 From now on you will not be able to ascend into heaven unto all eternity, (1st Enoch 14:3-5) because their rebellion had much greater ramifications than simple disagreement with God.

The jewish Haggadah describes the “wary reluctance” some souls experienced to leave a pre-mortal “heaven” to be born into mortality. Speaking this sort of “reluctance” the Zohar describes how God, tells a spirit to Go now, descend into this and that place, into this and this body.” Yet often enough the soul would reply: “Lord of the world, I am content to remain in this realm, , and have no wish to depart to some other, where I shall be in thralldom, and become stained.” Whereupon the Holy One, be blessed, would reply: “Your destiny is, and has been from the day of thy forming, to go into that world.

Such “unconfidence” is not “rebellion” and such souls are given encouragement and still sent into mortality through birth according to God’s plan. However, just as “reluctance” is not “rebellion”, Lucifer’s “rebellion” was not merely “reluctance”. Lucifer’s rebellion was described as a willful and confident full fledged disagreement which evolved into a plan for an asaultive counter “coup” having a DIFFERENT administration under a DIFFERENT King and DIFFERENT goals to the ultimate effect of nullifying God’s initial plan. In the context of controversies such as Lucifer’s “last straw” over Adam, one can better understand the sparks that made up the fires of the Rebellion or “war in heaven” itself.

In reference to a different, earlier controversy regarding the knowledge, that IF man, having free will, was sent to earth, then mankind would certainly commit moral atrocities. This was known long before the fall of Adam, and in fact, long before Adam was placed into the Garden. 3rd Enoch relates one of the fallen angels complaints against God the Father and his plan and the reply of the future messiah. :

"Then three of the ministering angels, Uzzah, Azzah, and Aza’el, came and laid charges against me in the heavenly height. They said before the Holy One, blessed be he, ‘Lord of the Universe, did not the primeval ones give you good advice when they said, Do not create man!’ The Holy One, blessed be he, replied, ‘I have made and will sustain him; I will carry and deliver him.(3rd Enoch 4:6)

Such references hint of the other controversies and together, they offer a coherent history regarding such related controversies and their relationship to Lucifers Fall.


Regarding the current Controversy with Adam :

Jewish Haggadah relates that “The extraordinary qualities with which Adam was blessed, physical and spiritual as well, aroused the envy of the angels......You created us angels from the splendor of the Shekinah, and now you command us to cast ourselves down before the creature which you fashioned out of the dust of the ground!” God answered, “Yet this dust of the ground has more wisdom and understanding than you.”...

This Haggadic summary illuminates the growing anger in an envious Lucifer. This haggadic text goes on to relate a subsequent battle of wits between the spirits of Lucifer and Adam which leaves Lucifer publicly upstaged and discontented and frustrated. Much like the one-sided debates we sometimes see on this public forum when a poster loses face. How would an envious, upstaged and angry Lucifer be expected to react? Especially given that the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it.” 2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1;

As the earth was created and it’s preparations finished and the time arrived for God’s plan to be inaugurated, the mood among the hosts of heaven becomes one of anticipation and excitement. It is under these circumstance that the body for Adam is created and joined to his spirit and God commanded that Adam was to be honored for his role in inaugurating God’s plan upon the earth. Michael calls all the angels to honor Adam for what he is about to do. A seemingly “fed up” Lucifer arrives to the occasion with a bad attitude.

POST FOUR OF FOUR FOLLOWS
 
Last edited:

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
POST FOUR OF FOUR
As I’ve pointed out, there are many, many confirming versions of this same story. In these early christian texts, the anger and frustration of Lucifer does not remain a private gripe, but becomes an open rebellion.

... one from the order of the archangels deviated, together with the division that was under his authority. He thought up the impossible idea, that he might place his throne higher than the clouds which are above the earth, and that he might become equal to my power. 5 And I hurled him out from the height, together with his angels. (2nd Enoch 29:3-5)

The Book of John the evangelist confirms Satan’s presumption in similar language “He set his seat above the clouds of heaven”. Bartholemew records this occurrence in almost the same words as the other versions : I will set my throne over against his throne” (bar 4:55) ;

It is for carrying out the actual plan and organized attempt toset up [his] throne above the stars of heaven and ..be like the Most High that Lucifer was punished. (“Stars” was a euphamism for the greatest angels). Speaking of Lucifer and the angels who allied with him the ancient psalm read : Now as they were warring with each other, they made bold to attack the land of Light, considering themselves capable of conquering it. Yet they know not that what they thought will recoil upon their own heads. But there was a host of angels in the Land of Light which possessed the power to issue forth and overcome the enemy of the Father, whom it pleased that through the Word that he would send, he should subdue the rebels who desired to raise themselves above what was more exalted than they.... (The Coptic Psalm-book - Let us worship the spirit of the paraclete) Psalm 223 (allberry 9-11) p 328; )

This attempted “coup” would have divided heaven and created a rival Kingship over a rival group in heaven. It was an attempt to set up a rival administration with it’s own rival plan for man. This was no mere show of minor “disloyalty”. Also, one should note the doctrine that the father delegated the successful battle which overcame Lucifer “through the Word” (who was his son). The earthly Devil had undergone multiple prior perceived offenses as the pre-mortal Lucifer. AND, his memories of pre-mortal happenings were not “veiled” from him, as Adams were. Certain battle lines were drawn long, long ago.


It is in this larger set of contexts that it was said : And the Rebel meditating these things Fol. 5b, col. 2 would not render obedience to God, and of his own free will he asserted his independence and separated himself from God. But he was - swept away out of heaven and fell, and the fall of himself and of all his company from heaven took place ...because he turned aside from the right way, ... he lost the apparel of his glory. And behold, from that time until the present day, he and all his hosts have been stripped of their apparel, (Cave of Treasures, chapt on “The Revolt of Satan”)

It’s unnecessary to the purpose of this exposition to discussed the symbolism of Lucifer’s apparel, his armor, and the “names” which were written in his hand (as the christian Abbaton also describes in greater detail), but it’s apparent that Lucifer unwillingly undergoes a ritual removal of his powers and authorities and authority for leadership and, with those angels who took part in his planned rebellion, he is cast down into the earth. However, such histories lend sense and context and confirmation to other histories such as Apocalypse of abraham when Azaz’el is told regarding Abraham ...shame on you Azazel! For Abraham’s portion is in heaven, and yours is on earth, for you have selected here, (and) become enamored of the dwelling place of your blemish. .... For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him, and the corruption which was on him has gone over to you.” (The Apocalypse of Abraham 13: 4,5,7-14)

Once Lucifer finds himself and his fallen angels on the earth, his own recognition and understanding and sense of what he had done increased, but this recognition was not associated with remorse nor repentance, but rather with an obstinate resolve and desire and plan for revenge (and other motives) and for continuing his rebellion.

..he fled from heaven; Sotona, because his name was satanail. 5 In this way he became different from the angels. His nature did not change, (but) his thought did, since his consciousness of righteous and sinful things changed. And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam." (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1)


It is in such a context that later, the fallen Lucifer later explained to the fallen Adam the source of Lucifers' enmity towards Adam (who could not remember events prior to mortality) : ..Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ .... When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. And Michael asserted, ‘Worship the image of God. But if now you will not worship, the Lord God will be wrathful with you.’ And I said, ‘If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and will be like the Most High.” (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3)

I hope that it is clear that the early Christian doctrine and tradition that Adam was created in the image of God not only existed but the doctrine finds itself in the midst of multiple other profound doctrines and traditions which are inextricably tied to it. One cannot simply explain away this single doctrine by claiming a single word was a metaphor. MANY other doctrines and traditions are tied to this doctrine.

I hope it is also clear that the early Christians and texts DID have a sensible concept of the origin of the Devil and for some of the underlying motives as to why Lucifer battles against God and God's plan for the moral education of those among mankind who are willing and wanting to live by the moral laws which will ultimately prepare them to live in happiness and harmony in a social heaven for eternity.

Compared to modern theories (or lack of theories), the ancient Christian doctrines that were in the context of pre-creation/pre-mortal theology were, I think, more coherent and more logical and represented a more accurate view, not only of the Devils origin but of Gods purposes and the relationships that existed both then and now. Such doctrines were "great crossroads of agreement" for early Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions AND Importantly, they explain and make rational, many of the most difficult moral and theological questions that plague modern christian theory.

Clear
ειτζφιφυω
 
Last edited:
Top