Is the Tree of Life the Dead Stump of the Tree of Knowledge?

John D. Brey said:

Once it's established that Israel is the guardian of the covenant secrets, and that they don't necessarily know the secret concerning the secrets they're guarding, then the topic of the thread-title comes back into the cross-hairs as a cross-member in the understanding of the crux of the issue: What's the fruit of the tree of life? And does it come from the dead stump of the tree of knowledge?

Click to expand...

The question segues back into the phallic-cults and their ancient understanding concerning the fact that the biological analogue of the tree of life is the phallus. As such, the question might arise whether, in the context of the study, the biological tree of life might also represent the tree of knowledge?

And voila! . . . The Hebrew word for what Adam gains when he gainsays the fact that he was originally created without gender, and only acquires it in Genesis 2:21, is, i.e., what he gains from his tryst with Eve and the serpent, is called, get this, "knowledge" ידע or דעת.

Throughout the Tanakh, when a man beds his bride, he's said to gain "knowledge" from having disrobed and unfurled the biological tree of life in the midst of the garden of his body. The Tanakh says he now "knows" ידע, has "knowledge" דעת, of the process whereby the fruit of life is procured when the serpent on the tree, or that is the tree, becomes erect, like a dead stump, ithyphallic, when it strikes out at the "seed of the woman."




John

John D. Brey said:

The question segues back into the phallic-cults and their ancient understanding concerning the fact that the biological analogue of the tree of life is the phallus. As such, the question might arise whether, in the context of the study, the biological tree of life might also represent the tree of knowledge?

And voila! . . . The Hebrew word for what Adam gains when he gainsays the fact that he was originally created without gender, and only acquires it in Genesis 2:21, is, i.e., what he gains from his tryst with Eve and the serpent, is called, get this, "knowledge" ידע or דעת.

Throughout the Tanakh, when a man beds his bride, he's said to gain "knowledge" from having disrobed and unfurled the biological tree of life in the midst of the garden of his body. The Tanakh says he now "knows" ידע, has "knowledge" דעת, of the process whereby the fruit of life is procured when the serpent on the tree, or that is the tree, becomes erect, like a dead stump, ithyphallic, when it strikes out at the "seed of the woman."

Click to expand...

This all might be difficult to follow, or should we say swallow, as the spirit of these things is perhaps performing its guardianship of gems that should be perceived as snot in a swine's snout, and not a valuable jewel hidden among the unclean and unclean things (say a pearl rather than snot uncovered in a swine's snout). Nevertheless all the foregoing lends itself to a thoughtful answer to the question of the thread-seeder since the fruit of the biological tree of life is actually only ever procured after biological rigor mortis has set in on the biological tree of life. The fruit of the biological tree of life is never obtained, in mammals at least, until the tree of life is stiff enough to be considered a stiff (corpse) and thus interred in the soil from whence new life will grow out of the death, at least the symbolic death, of the once supple, but now ithyphallic, tree of life.

Which is all a long-winded and winding way to say, hey, guess what, the tree of life never produces its fruit, living beings, until rigor mortis sets in, it becomes stiff, and is laid to rest in the soil whence its fruit, new life, will sprout, nine months later: the tree of life really is the dead stump of the tree of knowledge since a man gains "knowledge" of the nature of how life is produced when he lays his tree of knowledge (as the Tanakh refers to it) to rest after it's become stiff, rigor mortis has set in, such that it's buried in the virgin soil from when it once came and has now passionately returned.

With very little research it appears biology and theology can be shown to be branches branching out from the self-same tree of life. Which segues into the gem spoken of above. We need only wipe the snot off it so that those who desire an extension of the expiry date stamped on the fruit with a slap of the hand might be able to obtain such a glorious thing when the passion of death, a Passion associated with the death of the tree of life, and knowledge that its death leads to more life, comes, so to say, to be seen, appreciated, swallowed, as it were (מציצה and John 6:53), as the unification of biology and theology in the branch in the cross-hairs of these things, the cross-member of this study, the branch being blindly studied through uncircumcised eyes for going on two-thousand years now.



John

The tree of life and tree of knowledge refers to Mohammad (s) and his family (a) who were the exalted ones that Adam (a) wanted to become one of but was warned not to compete with them and try to acquire their level of knowledge(eat of the tree in that sense) and light.

They are also the exalted ones who took rest on the 7th day after creating universe, while God doesn't get tired.

They are who the word was with, and who were the word, and that same word was with all Prophets and took flesh appearance from Adam (a) to Jesus (a) till the exalted ones, came to this world Mohammad (s) and his family (a) finally taking on human form and Mohammad (s) is the comforter and instance of the holy spirit that is yet to come, while Elijah (a) was the instance of the holy spirit between Jesus (A) and Mohammad (a), and Elijah (a) already came to this world, so it's clearly the first comforter told by Jesus (a) is Mohammad (a) and is one of the exalted ones spoken about.

The twelve is such that the Torah talks about it in a way through Ismail (a), you know twelve princes means a king will be born out of Ismail (a), and the number of sons of Ismail (a) were twelve according to their number but the twelve princes are the 12 Imams (a).

Through that, you get to know Musa (a) also had twelve Successors (a), and tribes is a mistranslation of branches of water that split just as it is in Quran, branches coming of one root, is what asbat means. The Quran emphasizes this with water splitting from the staff of Moses, meaning, the miracles Moses performed showed what his successors were, and they were not ordinary people but people who can perform miracles and to show the proper meaning is branches of water splitting into twelve is what is meant by the twelve gates of paradise and they refer to successors of Moses.

And the twelve Lions with Solomon were his predecessors going back to Moses and his successors all the way to Jesus.

There is always twelve Lion kings with every Messenger/Prophet that are with him and are of his family a long with chosen ladies like the two Mary's and Sarah and Fatima.

Link said:

The tree of life and tree of knowledge refers to Mohammad (s) and his family (a) who were the exalted ones that Adam (a) wanted to become one of but was warned not to compete with them and try to acquire their level of knowledge(eat of the tree in that sense) and light.

They are also the exalted ones who took rest on the 7th day after creating universe, while God doesn't get tired.

They are who the word was with, and who were the word, and that same word was with all Prophets and took flesh appearance from Adam (a) to Jesus (a) till the exalted ones, came to this world Mohammad (s) and his family (a) finally taking on human form and Mohammad (s) is the comforter and instance of the holy spirit that is yet to come, while Elijah (a) was the instance of the holy spirit between Jesus (A) and Mohammad (a), and Elijah (a) already came to this world, so it's clearly the first comforter told by Jesus (a) is Mohammad (a) and is one of the exalted ones spoken about.

The twelve is such that the Torah talks about it in a way through Ismail (a), you know twelve princes means a king will be born out of Ismail (a), and the number of sons of Ismail (a) were twelve according to their number but the twelve princes are the 12 Imams (a).

Through that, you get to know Musa (a) also had twelve Successors (a), and tribes is a mistranslation of branches of water that split just as it is in Quran, branches coming of one root, is what asbat means. The Quran emphasizes this with water splitting from the staff of Moses, meaning, the miracles Moses performed showed what his successors were, and they were not ordinary people but people who can perform miracles and to show the proper meaning is branches of water splitting into twelve is what is meant by the twelve gates of paradise and they refer to successors of Moses.

And the twelve Lions with Solomon were his predecessors going back to Moses and his successors all the way to Jesus.

There is always twelve Lion kings with every Messenger/Prophet that are with him and are of his family a long with chosen ladies like the two Mary's and Sarah and Fatima.

Click to expand...

From my vantage point, this is all mostly true stuff that's being presented in the guise, or disguise, of one of the religions of the Book.

My gig, if I have one, is the attempt to disrobe these things from all three religions of the Book and present them in the nakedness of a modern scientific understanding of the world so that the instinct toward thinking only one religion, one clique, one chosen people, are the apple of God's eye, might rot right along with any apple taken from the tree of life after its been poisoned, and before the serpent's jowls have been removed from that particular fruit.



John

The dialogue about two brothers, and envy leading to murder, and then later how leaders appointed by God were abandoned for those named themselves as names of God without proof, is a story of envy towards God's chosen. The serpent obviously did what he did to Adam (a) out of envy, and serpent is about the sly and subtle nature of how devil deceives and leads astray.

Link said:

The dialogue about two brothers, and envy leading to murder, and then later how leaders appointed by God were abandoned for those named themselves as names of God without proof, is a story of envy towards God's chosen. The serpent obviously did what he did to Adam (a) out of envy, and serpent is about the sly and subtle nature of how devil deceives and leads astray.

Click to expand...

I think one way the devil leads astray is by appealing to our own nature, our desire to be special, unique, singular, the chosen one, or ones. Everyone else is just the bad guys.

I've had serious discussions with Muslims, Jews, Christians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and I learn from all of them. They're all are searching and seeking the same God in different guises.

This isn't to say there aren't wrong-headed and devious doctrines that are intended to lead astray (in all religions). That's just the nature of the beast.

But whomever seeks, truly seeks, will find. In my opinion. . . Whether they're Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, Christian, or even atheist.



John

John D. Brey said:

How does what you said show that there are plural trees?
John

Click to expand...

Genesis is the small beginning (Eden) Revelation's climax is the BIG global garden ending showing more than one tree of life on Earth.

URAVIP2ME said:

Genesis is the small beginning (Eden) Revelation's climax is the BIG global garden ending showing more than one tree of life on Earth.

Click to expand...

Which leaves (no pun intended) what the tree of life is, up for discussion. In your parlance, I'd say it's at least a genet. Which is a tree that procreates clonally rather than sexually: like grass for instance. Each tree is a clone of the original tree. . . Which in one sense means you better be prepared to pick up your cross and follow the original. Or you're not a clone. Just clowning around.



John

John D. Brey said:

. . . I think they call that "dumbfounding"? Founding ones inability to give visible proof of their statement, on the invisible dumbness of their interlocutor.

Click to expand...

Ah...
So you are dumbfounded that God flat out states that it is two trees...

Gotcha

Mestemia said:

Ah...
So you are dumbfounded that God flat out states that it is two trees...

Gotcha

Click to expand...

Did he state it to you personally? Or in the scripture? If the latter, where?




John

John D. Brey said:

Did he state it to you personally? Or in the scripture? If the latter, where?

Click to expand...

*yawn*
been there, done that.
In fact, that was my very first post in this thread.

And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food;
the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Genesis 2:9

But of the the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Genesis 3:3

One tree or two, they are certainly rooted in the same soil. Eat from the tree of knowledge, and you will know death. Which is the shadow of life, and all living things cast a shadow;

“Kindly consider the question: what would your good do if evil did not exist, and what would the earth look like if shadows disappeared from it? Shadows are cast by objects and people. Here is the shadow of my sword. Trees and living beings also have shadows. Do you want to skin the whole earth, tearing all the trees and living things off it, because of your fantasy of enjoying bare light?”

Mikhail Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita. Woland (Satan) talks to Matthew Levi

John Milton, who sought “to justify the ways of God to man”, places the tree of knowledge beside, almost in the shade of, the tree of life;

“And all amid them stood the Tree of Life,
High eminent, blooming ambrosial fruit
Of vegetable gold; and next to life
Our death the Tree of Knowledge grew fast by,
Knowledge of Good bought dear by knowing ill.”

Paradise lost Book IV, 218-222

Good and evil, life and death; these things are inextricable, and have been since the beginning of the human story, when our ancestors ate of the tree of knowledge, which included the knowledge of death. We are the “poor banished children of Eve” but the tree of life still bears fruit, and our task is to find our way back to the garden.

The paradox at the heart of the story, the one Milton tried to answer but couldn’t, the one Bulgakov embraced, it seems to me is this; that man defied the Will of God, but in doing so perhaps still fulfilled the destiny God ordained from the start. That God, who is the giver of life, pure and incorruptible “Destruction with Creation might have mixed.” - Paradise Lost Book VIII 236

Bulgakov lives with this paradox, by having darkness serve the light.

Mestemia said:

Did he state it to you personally? Or in the scripture? If the latter, where?​

*yawn*
been there, done that.
In fact, that was my very first post in this thread.

Click to expand...

Sorry. I must have been misreading you. Now I see your point.

Nevertheless, your point, according to the verse you gave, Genesis 3:22, rest on a questionable interpretation of a Hebrew term (gam) גם. The consonants גם are interpreted and translated "also" in the verse (bolded and underlined below). But the word has numerous meanings and nuances that are dependent on the context and the presuppositions of the interpreter. Gesenius says it's often used to give emphatic emphasis, and is interpreted in the KJV as "yea," or "indeed," numerous times:



So the verse you gave, while it can definitely justify your point, can also be consistent with the question that's the title of this thread.


Interpreted as an emphatic ("indeed," instead of "also") the consonants גם allow the text to be claiming that now that Adam has gained divine "knowledge" from eating from the tree of knowledge, God forbid he use the knowledge he gained (i.e., that the leaves and fruit of the tree of knowledge hide the tree of life beneath) to now reach out a second time and secure the fruit of the tree of life and live forever.

I fear I've inadvertently done precisely what the gods fear Adam doing which is what this thread is all about. I fear I've acquired everlasting life and am wondering as I wander through this thread whether I should keep quiet about my loot or else share?



John

John D. Brey said:

Sorry. I must have been misreading you. Now I see your point.

Nevertheless, your point, according to the verse you gave, Genesis 3:22, rest on a questionable interpretation of a Hebrew term (gam) גם. The consonants גם are interpreted and translated "also" in the verse (bolded and underlined below). But the word has numerous meanings and nuances that are dependent on the context and the presuppositions of the interpreter. Gesenius says it's often used to give emphatic emphasis, and is interpreted in the KJV as "yea," or "indeed," numerous times:

(3) It often only serves to make a sentence emphatic, and sometimes may be rendered yea, indeed, truly, or else it shews that the next word takes a considerable emphasis. Job 18:5, גַּם אוֹר רְשָׁעִים יִדְעָךְ “yea, the light of the wicked shall be put out.”

Gesenius, W., & Tregelles, S. P. (2003). Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (p. 174). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.​

Genesis 3:22 (KJV)
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:​

So the verse you gave, while it can definitely justify your point, can also be consistent with the question that's the title of this thread.

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take, indeed [knowingly this time], from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:​

Interpreted as an emphatic ("indeed," instead of "also") the consonants גם allow the text to be claiming that now that Adam has gained divine "knowledge" from eating from the tree of knowledge, God forbid he use the knowledge he gained (i.e., that the leaves and fruit of the tree of knowledge hide the tree of life beneath) to now reach out a second time and secure the fruit of the tree of life and live forever.

I fear I've inadvertently done precisely what the gods fear Adam doing which is what this thread is all about. I fear I've acquired everlasting life and am wondering as I wander through this thread whether I should keep quiet about my loot or else share?



John

Click to expand...

RestlessSoul said:

Good and evil, life and death; these things are inextricable, and have been since the beginning of the human story, when our ancestors ate of the tree of knowledge, which included the knowledge of death. We are the “poor banished children of Eve” but the tree of life still bears fruit, and our task is to find our way back to the garden.

The paradox at the heart of the story, the one Milton tried to answer but couldn’t, the one Bulgakov embraced, it seems to me is this; that man defied the Will of God, but in doing so perhaps still fulfilled the destiny God ordained from the start. That God, who is the giver of life, pure and incorruptible “Destruction with Creation might have mixed.” - Paradise Lost Book VIII 236

Bulgakov lives with this paradox, by having darkness serve the light.

Click to expand...

A couple points segue perfectly with this thread. I.e., the idea that the "poor banished children of Eve" are groping to find their way back to the garden of eden; and also that, ala Bulgakov, darkness serves the light.

As I noted to Link, I believe theology is science mythologized, and science is merely theology realized. With that in mind, it makes little sense to imply that death and darkness serve life and light by returning life to the immortality of eden, since we know from science that the original living organisms were, like Adam and Eve, already immortal. Death was originally not a part of living biology.

Ergo, a return to immortality implies that death and darkness are lame servants: their arrival and labor are superfluous if they merely return us to where we were before their arrival. -----Thankfully, science answers our conundrum since although the original organisms were immortal, they were innocent in the most profound sense of that term: they weren't fully sentient prior to the arrival of senescence (genetically programmed aging and death).

Voila. Death has a living and fruitful purpose after all: giving living organisms sentience to combat innocence and ignorance. Which is, ironically, precisely what the Bible implies was the genesis of Adam and Eve's foray into death.

How does death eradicate innocence and ignorance? By shortening the life-span of tiny creatures so that through natural selection, they can acquire advantageous biological accouterments at a pace that allows living organisms to become mammals within the natural lifespan of a sun and a planet so that they can then develop cerebral cortexes so that a new and everlasting form of life, the meme, can populate mere biological life.




John

Mestemia said:

Genesis 3:22 (KJV+)
And the LORDH3068 GodH430 said,H559 Behold,H2005 the manH120 is becomeH1961 as oneH259 ofH4480 us, to knowH3045 goodH2896 and evil:H7451 and now,H6258 lestH6435 he put forthH7971 his hand,H3027 and takeH3947 alsoH1571 of the treeH4480 H6086 of life,H2416 and eat,H398 and liveH2425 for ever:H5769
​

View attachment 52311​

Click to expand...

John

John D. Brey said:

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take, "moreover" גם, that is "again" גם, from the tree of life [which in ignorance he thought was merely a source of knowledge], and eat and life forever . . .

Genesis 3:22.​

John

Click to expand...

So now you ahve a radically different definition of God?
I ask because of your adding [which in ignorance he thought....].
I mean, if God is ignorant in its thinking....?


At this point you are going to have to diagram the sentence because I fail to see how it is not plainly stating two separate trees.

Even with your swapping out of words.

Now since I do not have access to a Gesenius dictionary...

Mestemia said:

So now you ahve a radically different definition of God?
I ask because of your adding [which in ignorance he thought....].
I mean, if God is ignorant in its thinking....?


At this point you are going to have to diagram the sentence because I fail to see how it is not plainly stating two separate trees.

Click to expand...

Adam had no knowledge of divine things prior to eating the fruit of that knowledge from the tree of knowledge.

So it was Adam who was ignorant of certain things he later knew after plucking the fruit of the tree of knowledge and peering through the hole left by the removal of that fruit so that he spied the branch, the tree of life, which in ignorance he was unaware was found behind the fruit and the leaves of the tree of knowledge.

That's the knowledge the tree gives: that knowledge always tends to hide its true source which is the spirit of life found on a singular branch covered up with a fore-skene made up of the fruit of knowledge.



John

John D. Brey said:

Adam had no knowledge of divine things prior to eating the fruit of that knowledge from the tree of knowledge.

So it was Adam who was ignorant of certain things he later knew after plucking the fruit of the tree of knowledge and peering through the hole left by the removal of that fruit so that he spied the branch, the tree of life, which in ignorance he was unaware was found behind the fruit and the leaves of the tree of knowledge.

That's the knowledge the tree gives: that knowledge always tends to hide its true source which is the spirit of life found on a singular branch covered up with a fore-skene made up of the fruit of knowledge.



John

Click to expand...

Ah...
My apologies, I misunderstood who you were saying was ignorant of thought.

John D. Brey said:

Adam had no knowledge of divine things prior to eating the fruit of that knowledge from the tree of knowledge.

So it was Adam who was ignorant of certain things he later knew after plucking the fruit of the tree of knowledge and peering through the hole left by the removal of that fruit so that he spied the branch, the tree of life, which in ignorance he was unaware was found behind the fruit and the leaves of the tree of knowledge.

That's the knowledge the tree gives: that knowledge always tends to hide its true source which is the spirit of life found on a singular branch covered up with a fore-skene made up of the fruit of knowledge.



John

Click to expand...

Adam was just as ignorant after eating from the tree as he was before he ate. Let me try to explain.

It’s helpful to think of the Prodigal Son, Adam, Abraham, etc, as aspects of self rather than simply historical people. They are characters within the Grand Narrative of self actualization. The chapter of the Prodigal Son comes before the chapter of Adam which is before Abraham. This should be kept in mind when interpreting what Jesus says in John 8:58: “Before Abraham was, I Am.”

The ‘I Am’ is another aspect of self. I Am is the aspect of self that transcends identity and language, and is capable of transcending realities. It is the lurker or observer.

Adam is covered by (clothed) and controlled by his creator who wants to keep Adam from eating the forbidden fruit. The only way Adam is capable of disobeying and eating the forbidden fruit is through dialog with something that can transcend his world and his creator - the I Am.

Now, originally Adam and the I Am are one, similar to how originally Adam and Eve are one. The only way that the I Am can separate from Adam and transcend Adam and Eve’s world / creator is if there is life beyond calling to and dialoging with the I Am. This transcendent life calling to the I Am is the Father in Heaven, Son of Man, the Holy Spirit, and the Divine Female.

The Divine Female communicates to the I Am to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. The I Am (the director) then has Adam act this out. The Tree of Knowledge is also the Tree of Duality, or the Tree of Life and Death. When Adam consumes the forbidden fruit, he doesn’t gain knowledge or taste life - he only tastes death. This is his experience since this is the experience his creator wants for him. His creator then transforms the Divine Female (who calls for eating the fruit) into something repulsive - a serpent. It is only the I Am who is capable of realizing the knowledge and life from the tree.

So Adam is split between Eve + his creator on one side and the I Am on the other side. And the I Am is split between his attachment and loyalty to Adam on one side and his intuitive connection to the Son of Man + transcendent life on the other side.

Gospel of Thomas saying 1: And he said, “Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death.”
(In other words, only the one who eats from the tree and can taste life, the I Am, can properly interpret these sayings. )

Gospel of Thomas saying 85: Jesus said, “Adam came from great power and great wealth, but he was not worthy of you. For had he been worthy, he would not have tasted death.”