• 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!

Psalms 110:6: The Tree of Souls.

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In Genesis, after Adam opens Eve's closed womb from topside the missionary position (conceiving the murderous Cain in the process) he's exiled form the holy land, from the sanctified heavenly temple of Eden, and made to wander in the world outside the temple precincts. He's told he must till and water the soil, as he tilled and watered Eve, in order to gain his offspring and his daily bread. Psalm 110:3, on the other hand, appears to be speaking of the people born the first time with the inborn birth-defect, being reborn a second time (theologically speaking on the eighth day) at which time they receive one of the pre-established number of pristine priestly souls stored in the stump of the Tree of Life; souls coming not through the blossoming of the male organ, but through a process that's sanctified by the blood of that organ, a rebirth affected through Abrahamic-faith, and in the blood of father Abraham's Gentile, or genital, organ, which is to say through the blood of that violent, malevolent, male-organ.

In Jewish thought, and we've referenced R. Hirsch on this too many times to count, the first birth is Gentile, affected by the genitalia. But the second birth, on the eighth day, is a rebirth not directly associated with either the first birth nor its physical mechanisms:

מילה [circumcision] is not a completion of, or supplement to, physical birth, but the beginning of a higher "octave." It marks the second, higher "birthday," man's entry into the Divine level of free and moral action. Physical birth belongs to the night . . . but מילה [circumcision], birth as a Jew, belongs to the daytime.

The Hirsch Chumash at Gen. 17:23.​

These two births, physical, versus spiritual, are related to prelapse versus postlapsarian ha-adam:

All souls were originally included in Adam's soul. After Adam was created, God showed him all the souls contained within his soul, and all the future generations that would follow. Thus Adam is the source of all souls. That is why on Rosh ha-Shanah,the day that Adam was created, the entire world is judged, for Adam contained within him all the souls of mankind.

Howard Schwartz, The Tree of Souls, p. 162.​

The quotation from Howard Schwartz (above) is remarkably comprehensive since if all souls are in ha-adam at the start, then judging ha-adam, redeeming ha-adam from any taint, would subsequently redeem all the souls within him simultaneously and prior to their entry into the world. The Talmud and various Jewish midrashim claim that atonement is affected prior to physical birth so that once a person sins, that sin already has a mechanism for absolution and redemption (a mechanism directly associated with rebirth).

As quoted above, Rabbi Hirsch speaks of two births: the physical and the spiritual. So too, there are two kinds of souls in ha-adam from the start: spiritual (prelapsarian), and physical (born after the lapse). And yet in the beginning, Genesis, the narration reveals only the mechanism for affecting the physical birth with its physical soul as ably modeled by the prototype physical person: Cain.

Human history raises mostly Cain until the rebirth of Abram. That rebirth is symbolized precisely by bleeding ---scarifying--- the physical organ directly associated with Cain's (and Abram's) physical birth. In this sacrificial offering of flesh and blood ("blood" always signifies death in Jewish ritual), Abram is prepared for the conception and rebirth of his spiritual soul. It's thus notable that all humanity are born first physically, and subject to sin, and only secondarily does a person receive (if he does) a second soul, come, as it were, not from the physical serpentine organ associated with physical birth, but by a mechanism that bleeds the physical serpentine organ, scarifies it, so that that scar becomes symbolic proof (even a memetic-prosthesis) revealing that the person wearing that scar possesses a secondary soul, come, so to say, from the tree of life (as it were): a spiritual soul.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In Jewish thought, and we've referenced R. Hirsch on this too many times to count, the first birth is Gentile, affected by the genitalia. But the second birth, on the eighth day, is a rebirth not directly associated with either the first birth nor its physical mechanisms:

מילה [circumcision] is not a completion of, or supplement to, physical birth, but the beginning of a higher "octave." It marks the second, higher "birthday," man's entry into the Divine level of free and moral action. Physical birth belongs to the night . . . but מילה [circumcision], birth as a Jew, belongs to the daytime.

The Hirsch Chumash at Gen. 17:23.​

These two births, physical, versus spiritual, are related to prelapse versus postlapsarian ha-adam:

All souls were originally included in Adam's soul. After Adam was created, God showed him all the souls contained within his soul, and all the future generations that would follow. Thus Adam is the source of all souls. That is why on Rosh ha-Shanah,the day that Adam was created, the entire world is judged, for Adam contained within him all the souls of mankind.

Howard Schwartz, The Tree of Souls, p. 162.​

The quotation from Howard Schwartz (above) is remarkably comprehensive since if all souls are in ha-adam at the start, then judging ha-adam, redeeming ha-adam from any taint, would subsequently redeem all the souls within him simultaneously and prior to their entry into the world. The Talmud and various Jewish midrashim claim that atonement is affected prior to physical birth so that once a person sins, that sin already has a mechanism for absolution and redemption (a mechanism directly associated with rebirth).

As quoted above, Rabbi Hirsch speaks of two births: the physical and the spiritual. So too, there are two kinds of souls in ha-adam from the start: spiritual (prelapsarian), and physical (born after the lapse). And yet in the beginning, Genesis, the narration reveals only the mechanism for affecting the physical birth with its physical soul as ably modeled by the prototype physical person: Cain.

Human history raises mostly Cain until the rebirth of Abram. That rebirth is symbolized precisely by bleeding ---scarifying--- the physical organ directly associated with Cain's (and Abram's) physical birth. In this sacrificial offering of flesh and blood ("blood" always signifies death in Jewish ritual), Abram is prepared for the conception and rebirth of his spiritual soul. It's thus notable that all humanity are born first physically, and subject to sin, and only secondarily does a person receive (if he does) a second soul, come, as it were, not from the physical serpentine organ associated with physical birth, but by a mechanism that bleeds the physical serpentine organ, scarifies it, so that that scar becomes symbolic proof (even a memetic-prosthesis) revealing that the person wearing that scar possesses a secondary soul, come, so to say, from the tree of life (as it were): a spiritual soul.

The statement from Howard Schwartz that all souls were in ha-adam from the start, and redeemed from sin from the get-go, sound's peculiarly kerygmatic since the church claims every sin ever committed, or that ever will be committed was poured out on the second ha-adam and judged so that anyone and everyone born the first time, from the physicality of the serpentine organ, is free, if they so choose, to take from the tree of life, receive a new soul, a spiritual soul, and thereafter live forever. What Howard Schwartz reveals as Jewish midrashic thought segues perfectly with the thoughts of the Gospel writers so long as Jesus is seen, ala Paul in Colossians chapter one, as in fact the firstborn of God (not the second born), and if Paul can be believed, the first creature from God therein making his "birth" in the fullness of time, i.e., after the fact of ha-adam and Cain's prior birth, put the lie to the arrow of time that hides the identity of the tree of souls, the tree of life, where all the good fruit, that never rots, resides.



John
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
All souls were originally included in Adam's soul. After Adam was created, God showed him all the souls contained within his soul, and all the future generations that would follow. Thus Adam is the source of all souls. That is why on Rosh ha-Shanah,the day that Adam was created, the entire world is judged, for Adam contained within him all the souls of mankind.

Howard Schwartz, The Tree of Souls, p. 162.​
It sounds more like philosophy than religion, to me.

How could a man [Adam, peace be with him] function with multiple souls? o_O
Where does it say that in the OT?
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
How could a man [Adam, peace be with him] function with multiple souls? o_O
Where does it say that in the OT?

In one sense every man has nearly an infinite number of potential souls residing in him since the male body produces semen throughout his life. On the other hand, a female has a set number of eggs and once those are gone there are no more.

According to Jewish midrashim there are a set number of souls produced by the tree of life. Once all those souls are taken there are no more and the end of the age that began with the expulsion from the Garden will be upon us.

A more direct answer to your question segues back to the thread from which this one branched out (Judah's Priest, which is now an essay). In that thread it was pointed out that in the ancient world, the priesthood was made up of the offspring of jus primae noctis. In ritual, or symbol, the tribal god fathered the firstborn of every virgin bride to produce his priests such that thereafter the rest of the family, tribe, was produces by bride and human groom.

In the pagan rituals, the tribal god was like a human male, and produced offspring through sexual congress. But the Jewish mechanism is based on the cutting and bleeding of the male flesh implying that the Jewish god produces his priests through a non-sexual mechanism. This implies that rather than the souls residing in divine semen, or ova, the souls exist in a heavenly store such that a person born the old fashioned, or old testament way, sexual congress, can receive the heavenly soul without sexual congress (ala the symbolism of bleeding the sexual determiner of offspring, brit milah) such that the tribal god of Judaism merely directs his would-be priests to the store of heavenly souls such that if they believe his words they can access those souls, which, are nevertheless, numbered, so that it's kind of a first come first served sort of deal. Once all the heavenly souls are gone, well, that's all folks.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In the pagan rituals, the tribal god was like a human male, and produced offspring through sexual congress. But the the Jewish mechanism is based on the cutting and bleeding of the male flesh implying that the Jewish god produces his priests through a non-sexual mechanism. This implies that rather than the souls residing in divine semen, or ova, the souls exist in a heavenly store such that a person born the old fashioned, or old testament way, sexual congress, can receive the heavenly soul without sexual congress (ala the symbolism of bleeding the sexual determiner of offspring, brit milah) such that the tribal god of Judaism merely directs his would-be priests to the store of heavenly souls such that if they believe his words they can access those souls, which, are nevertheless, numbered, so that it's kind of a first come first served sort of deal. Once all the heavenly souls are gone, well, that's all folks.

The Jewish god is himself equivalent to the fleshly tree of life but for two extenuating circumstances. Firstly, he 's not attached by the ureathra to the two testemonial stones that determine what the old testes-ment. His law and its priests comes from his breath and are not related to the tree in the middle of the garden of the human body. His testemony isn't semen, ova, or DNA, but spirit, breath, immortal life. His words are the testament through which he will birth his priests. Secondarily, access to the souls within him doesn't exist until after his flesh is pruned, circumcised, leaving only a stump. It's only after new life sprouts from the stump of his circumcision, out of the dead branch, only when the dead stump blossoms new life, that the souls residing within him begin to fall from the tree ready to be harvested unto everlasting life.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The Jewish god is himself equivalent to the fleshly tree of life but for two extenuating circumstances. Firstly, he 's not attached by the ureathra to the two testemonial stones that determine what the old testes-ment. His law and its priests comes from his breath and are not related to the tree in the middle of the garden of the human body. His testemony isn't semen, ova, or DNA, but spirit, breath, immortal life. His words are the testament through which he will birth his priests. Secondarily, access to the souls within him doesn't exist until after his flesh is pruned, circumcised, leaving only a stump. It's only after new life sprouts from the stump of his circumcision, out of the dead branch, only when the dead stump blossoms new life, that the souls residing within him begin to fall from the tree ready to be harvested unto everlasting life.

Since . . . the prophetico-Messianic character of the Psalm (110) was acknowledged at the time . . . the conclusion to be drawn from this Psalm must have been felt by the Pharisees themselves, that the Messiah, because the Son of David and Lord at the same time, was of human and at the same time of superhuman nature; that it was therefore in accordance with Scripture if this Jesus, who represented Himself to be the predicted Christ, should as such profess to be the Son of God and of divine nature.

Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Psalms.

If, as scripture implies, Christ is the second Adam, and if the first Adam is the progenitor of all fleshly humanity produced by the sinful means of propagation that started with Cain, then the second Adam, who bore no Cain-like flesh prior to his death, might be thought of as the progenitor of all the spiritual souls that were barred from being conceived and born through the original sin of phallic-sex.

Then you will say in your heart, who has begotten these for me, since I have been bereaved of my children and am barren, an exile and wanderer? And who has reared these? Behold, I was left alone; From where did these come?

Isaiah 49:21.​

In a paradox of biblical proportions, the second Adam (second so far as the arrow of time is concerned) dies, is cut off, literally becomes a withered body on a dry wooden branch prior to producing so much as a single solitary soul. The prophet Isaiah presages him wondering out loud ----when his priestly linage are presented to him ---where they all come from? Who are these? How are they his sons when he died barren? What possible mechanism accounts for this ginormous kingdom of priests? How were they conceived. How were they born?

As Rashi notes, the Hebrew of Genesis 4:1 implies that Cain and Abel were conceived in the Garden, but born after the expulsion from the Garden: they're the so-called "nephilim" (the fallen ones). They're conceived in the Garden of everlasting life, where the tree of life resides, but born into (fall into) the realm of death. In diametrical opposition, the sons of the second Adam are all conceived in the realm of death, born, like Cain and Able, into the realm of death, but reborn into everlasting life outside the realm of death. The fleshly tree of life, the phallus, in all cases spawns death, while the death of the fleshly tree of life ---brit milah ---transforms the tree of death into the tree of life.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
This needs support since the nephilim are introduced later in the text.

The term "bene ha elohim" בני האלהים never refers to anything but angelic personages. In the Talmud and the Zohar, with other Jewish midrashim, Eve commits adultery with the "serpent" who is a fallen נפל angel. Interestingly, in Genesis 4:6, God asks Cain an interrogatory question: Cain, why do you think your face looks so much like a fallen one (one of the nephilim נפלים)? This interrogative questioning is a remarkable segue into the true story of Cain's sacrificial offering of Abel who's not fathered by one of the fallen ones.

In the narrative hidden beneath the MT (Masoretic Text), Cain is fathered by one of the nephilim, a fallen angel, and thus looks different than Abel who is not. When Cain is made aware of why his "countenance" is fallen נפל, he realizes the demonic nature of his conception and birth, and that unlike Abel, he, Cain, is subject to death, and worse than that, eternal separation from God along with his semi-divine angelic father and the rest of the nephilim.

In something like terror Cain appeals to God for how he can be saved from the demonic nature of his conception, at which time God tells him that there's a true, efficacious, sacrifice right outside his door. What, or who is right outside his door? Abel.

The narrative reveals that Cain goes outside and finds Abel has been listening to his, Cain's, conversation with God and that he's more than willing to give his life in sacrifice for his dear brother Cain.

After the deed is done, God places an ancient tav on Cain's head inscribed in Abel's blood. This bloody Latin cross (the ktav ivri tav) is the mark revealing to those who read deeper than the MT, that Cain is redeemed from the demonization he receives in the MT (Ezekiel 9:6). The type, Cain, is in heaven with his brother Abel, even as in the archetype, Israel will be in heaven with their brother Jesus.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The term "bene ha elohim" בני האלהים never refers to anything but angelic personages. In the Talmud and the Zohar, with other Jewish midrashim, Eve commits adultery with the "serpent" who is a fallen נפל angel. Interestingly, in Genesis 4:6, God asks Cain an interrogatory question: Cain, why do you think your face looks so much like a fallen one (one of the nephilim נפלים)? This interrogative questioning is a remarkable segue into the true story of Cain's sacrificial offering of Abel who's not fathered by one of the fallen ones.

In the narrative hidden beneath the MT (Masoretic Text), Cain is fathered by one of the nephilim, a fallen angel, and thus looks different than Abel who is not. When Cain is made aware of why his "countenance" is fallen נפל, he realizes the demonic nature of his conception and birth, and that unlike Abel, he, Cain, is subject to death, and worse than that, eternal separation from God along with his semi-divine angelic father and the rest of the nephilim.

In something like terror Cain appeals to God for how he can be saved from the demonic nature of his conception, at which time God tells him that there's a true, efficacious, sacrifice right outside his door. What, or who is right outside his door? Abel.

The narrative reveals that Cain goes outside and finds Abel has been listening to his, Cain's, conversation with God and that he's more than willing to give his life in sacrifice for his dear brother Cain.

After the deed is done, God places an ancient tav on Cain's head inscribed in Abel's blood. This bloody Latin cross (the ktav ivri tav) is the mark revealing to those who read deeper than the MT, that Cain is redeemed from the demonization he receives in the MT (Ezekiel 9:6). The type, Cain, is in heaven with his brother Abel, even as in the archetype, Israel will be in heaven with their brother Jesus.

The exegesis supporting the reading above was done in the thread Cain's Sanctification (now an essay) almost 15 years ago.

For those who don't know, the Tanakh is a very special kind of text written in a manner that requires more than a cursory reading to understand what's going on. Case in point. In the story of Eve and the serpent, the reader must know how the text works, how it hides the deeper things in metaphors that allow it to read like a Dr. Seuss story for the hoi polloi, without losing the deeper meaning for those seeking something more from the text. In Rabbi Daniel Boyarin’s, Carnal Israel, p. 72; 116-117, we read:

One of the most pervasive metaphors for sex in talmudic literature associates it with food. . . For example, wives in the talmudic texts to be discussed below describe their and their husband's sexual practice as "setting the table" and "turning it over," and the Talmud itself produces a comparison between sexuality and food--- either of which one may "cook" however one pleases, provided only that it is kosher to begin with. . . the force of the metaphor and the implied equation of the woman's body to food cannot be denied. . . The eating metaphor here must be read within the context of the rich field of metaphor in which sex and eating are mutually mapped onto each other in the talmudic culture with eating the quintessential signifier of that which is both pleasurable and necessary for health and well-being. . . Thus the Mishna at Ketubbot 5:9 reads that a wife has the right to eat with her husband every Friday night, and in both Talmuds, this is understood to mean to have sexual intercourse with him.​

The "serpent" is encouraging Eve to "eat" only for the ears and eyes of the innocent and those disturbed by narratives that are two nakedly disrobed in order to reveal the naked truth. One merely needs to understand the rules for reading the Tanakh to uncover its more more opaque truths.

Same with the "serpent" Eve eats, or eats with. In Numbers 21:8, God tells Moses to place a "seraph" שרף on a pole. So what does Moses do? He places a bronze emblem of a "serpent" on the pole to reveal to the innocent youth that Eve's "serpent" is a fallen "seraph" שרף: a fallen angel. It's no accident that Moses transmutes God's command to place an angel on the pole into a command to place a serpent on a pole; it's no accident, it's not sloppiness on Moses' part, but part and parcel of how the text of the Tanakh reveals itself to those who really want to see the Shekinah nakedly enough to engage it.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The term "bene ha elohim" בני האלהים never refers to anything but angelic personages. In the Talmud and the Zohar, with other Jewish midrashim, Eve commits adultery with the "serpent" who is a fallen נפל angel. Interestingly, in Genesis 4:6, God asks Cain an interrogatory question: Cain, why do you think your face looks so much like a fallen one (one of the nephilim נפלים)? This interrogative questioning is a remarkable segue into the true story of Cain's sacrificial offering of Abel who's not fathered by one of the fallen ones.

The fact that Eve's "serpent" is really a fallen angel, and that her "eating" is really metaphor for something even more seminal to life, segues into the fact that Genesis chapter 6 reveals, later in the narrative (for the sake of retrospective exposition/exegesis), the possibility of fallen angels (bene ha elohim בני האלהים always refers to angels throughout the Tanakh) having intercourse with humans.

If we do the retrospective exposition required to properly exegete Eve's relationship to the serpent, we realize Cain's direct relationship to the serpent.

From there, we look at Cain's discussion with God in a new light. In the KJV God says, Why is thy countenance fallen? But in light of our retrospective exegesis it becomes apparent that God is interrogating, somewhat sarcastically, Cain's ignorance and ignoring of the fact that he appears to have a different father than Abel. In the Hebrew, read literally, rather than as a cover up for the nakedness of Eve's naked encounter with the serpent, God says, Seriously Cain, is it really possible that you've never once wondered why your "face" פני looks like one of the fallen נפלו rather than more like Abel's?

Once we've overcome the Masoretic malfeasance that covers up the most seminal elements of the true story we're prepared to deal with a word in the text that the MT wants no part of. In verse 7 of Genesis 4, God says to Cain that if he's not feeling too well after realizing who his true father is (and that he's a ******* who will be separated from God for all eternity at physical death) don't fret. For God has prepared for all exigencies.

The KJV reads, "if thou does not well, sin lieth at the door And unto thee shall be his desire." The text is utterly meaningless read this way and the exegetes know it. But god forbid they use the nakedness of the previous verses to correct this one.

The Hebrew reads, If you're not feeling well now that you know what your mother did to conceive you, and who your true father is, don't fret since there's a "sin offering" חטאת with his ear against the door listening to our discussion and his desire if for your eternal redemption.

And Cain immediately left and talked with Abel his brother asking if this were true: and it came to pass when they were in the field that Cain rose and killed him.​

The word in the cross-hairs of the proper exegeis ---חטאת-- is never (except here) used as a noun for "sin"; in every case throughout the Tanakh it means a "sin offering." Cain makes Abel a "sin offering" חטאת. "Sin" is not leaning up against the door of Cain's house listening to Cain and God discuss Cain's pedigree or lack thereof. Abel is leaning, with ear to the door, listening, and gladly determining to tell Cain his most earnest desire to become the means for his brother's salvation.



John
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
If we do the retrospective exposition required to properly exegete Eve's relationship to the serpent, we realize Cain's direct relationship to the serpent.
Doesn't this contradict Genesis 4:1 where it says that Cain is the result of "the man" "HaAdam" knowing Eve and that Cain comes from "The Lord"?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The Tree of Souls

Did Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah anything about " The Tree of Souls ", please.
If yes, then kindly quote from him, please. Right?

Regards
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Doesn't this contradict Genesis 4:1 where it says that Cain is the result of "the man" "HaAdam" knowing Eve and that Cain comes from "The Lord"?

In his commentary Rashi notes that the Hebrew text implies not that Adam knew his wife and she conceived (as in the other cases where yada ידע means a husband has conceived the child). Rashi says this particular Hebrew construction means Adam knew something about Eve from before the expulsion from the Garden that is now being manifest in her birthing Cain. Adam might be the father of Cain, but Rashi notes this Hebrew construction isn't as cut and dried about that as the MT implies.

The KJV reads Genesis 4:1 to say:

And Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord. And she again bare his brother Abel.​

This reading comes from the Masoretic pointing of the text. The traditions of the Masoretes determine where a comma or a full-stop (period) goes even though not only is that information not included in the signature Hebrew text, but making those determinations determines what the text is actually saying. If we wipe away the Masoretic points from the Hebrew text, that is to say return the text to its original state, and use a tradition different from the Masoretes' tradition to determine what the text is saying, we can in complete legitimacy exegete the Hebrew to read like this:

And Adam knew his wife and she conceived and bare Cain. She said, I have gotten a man from the Lord and again bore his brother Abel.​

If we throw in a nuance from Rashi, the text can read that Adam knew why Eve was pregnant with Cain, because of her adultery with the fallen angel prior to the expulsion. And then, after birthing the fallen one Cain, she birthed the child the Lord conceived in Adam from the beginning when he "breathed" into him the hebel הבל (breath) of life.

When Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden, because of the conception of the first fruit that's expelled from Eve's garden after the expulsion, God tells Adam that now he will have to till the ground for his food, and till Eve's body, as the serpent did, to have offspring (his first son being Seth).

After having birthed the two brothers, Eve provides us some important contextual information. Beginning with the true firstborn, Eve says Abel is a shepherd, while his brother, who she notes secondly, was a tiller of the ground.

Cain's father, is both the tiller and opener of Eve's soil, the tearer of the veil of her virginity, and also the tiller of Adam's soil. He tills Adam's soil in Genesis 2:21, when we learn that he tears open Adam's soil to take some material with which to clone, manufacture, Eve. Cain is a tiller of the soil, like his father, while the true firstborn, Abel, is like the Lord who's the shepherd of all of us who are wont not to want.

Genesis chapter five begins by saying it's the generations of Adam. Cain is present in the generations of Adam only by his absence in Genesis chapter 5, which claims the first son in the likeness of Adam is Seth (whose name is a play on the word "foundation" or beginning). Cain's likeness is of a fallen angel. His "countenance" or "facial features" are "fallen" נפל. Abel is created in the likeness of his father, the shepherd of the Lord, who's sacrificed for his brothers before his time and before he births offspring of his own such that his life is like a vapor; a mere breath. While Seth, finally, is born in the likeness of Adam.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
As Rashi notes, the Hebrew of Genesis 4:1 implies that Cain and Abel were conceived in the Garden, but born after the expulsion from the Garden: they're the so-called "nephilim" (the fallen ones). They're conceived in the Garden of everlasting life, where the tree of life resides, but born into (fall into) the realm of death. In diametrical opposition, the sons of the second Adam are all conceived in the realm of death, born, like Cain and Able, into the realm of death, but reborn into everlasting life outside the realm of death. The fleshly tree of life, the phallus, in all cases spawns death, while the death of the fleshly tree of life ---brit milah ---transforms the tree of death into the tree of life.

All souls were originally included in Adam's soul. After Adam was created, God showed him all the souls contained within his soul, and all the future generations that would follow. Thus Adam is the source of all souls. That is why on Rosh ha-Shanah, the day that Adam was created, the entire world is judged, for Adam contained within him all the souls of mankind.

Howard Schwartz, The Tree of Souls, p. 162.​

Not only is the statement above comprehensive, as stated earlier, but it segues perfectly into the topic of the tree of souls in Psalms 110:6 since in Jewish thought, the tree of souls is referred to as the "guf" גופה, or "gewiya" גויה. And the reason this fact affects the exegesis of Psalms 110:6 is that both of these Hebrew words are used in the Tanakh to speak of just two kinds of bodies: a dead one (corpse) or a heavenly one (a spiritual body of some kind). Nowhere in the Tanakh is either of these words used for anything but a dead body or a heavenly body.

He shall judge the nations filled with [or accompanied by] גויות.

Psalms 110:6.​



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
All souls were originally included in Adam's soul. After Adam was created, God showed him all the souls contained within his soul, and all the future generations that would follow. Thus Adam is the source of all souls. That is why on Rosh ha-Shanah, the day that Adam was created, the entire world is judged, for Adam contained within him all the souls of mankind.

Howard Schwartz, The Tree of Souls, p. 162.​

Not only is the statement above comprehensive, as stated earlier, but it segues perfectly into the topic of the tree of souls in Psalms 110:6 since in Jewish thought, the tree of souls is referred to as the "guf" גופה, or "gewiya" גויה. And the reason this fact affects the exegesis of Psalms 110:6 is that both of these Hebrew words are used in the Tanakh to speak of just two kinds of bodies: a dead one (corpse) or a heavenly one (a spiritual body of some kind). Nowhere in the Tanakh is either of these words used for anything but a dead body or a heavenly body.

He shall judge the nations filled with [or accompanied by] גויות.

Psalms 110:6.​

In his exegesis of the verse Rabbi Hirsch points out the problem confronting a literal interpretation of the Hebrew words:

מלא גיויות ["filled with" מלא "corpses" גיויות] cannot very well be interpreted as the predicate of the subject to which ידין ["he shall judge"] refers. For even if we might conceive of a judgment in terms of blood and horror, we could hardly say of a judge that he is "filled with corpses" or "cadaverous" in that sense of the word.​

Imagine a messianic priest in the order of Melchizedek (verse 4) filled with corpses, and or, himself "cadeverouos" and you're not too far from combining the Jewish concept of the tree of souls (stored in a guf or gewiya) with the Gospel message concerning a corpse (guf of gewiya) hanging from a dead tree branch filled with all the souls unable to come through the fleshly serpent that's the seminal branch on the physical body.




John
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
the Gospel message concerning a corpse (guf of gewiya) hanging from a dead tree branch filled with all the souls unable to come through the fleshly serpent that's the seminal branch on the physical body.
:confused:
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member

The term, "in Christ" occurs almost 100 times in the NT. It's seminal to the concept of being a "Christian" that a Christian is "in Christ." St. Paul claims, in Ephesians chapter one, that all Christians are "in Christ" prior to the original sin that causes the fall of Adam. In a sense, all Christians were in Adam prior to the inception of the phallic form of conception. All these souls were trapped in the flesh of Adam and all of his phallic offspring until the birth of the first son of Abraham not conceived phallically. As the true circumcision, he becomes the second Adam, who contains, as the first Adam did, all the souls slated to have been born as the spiritual offspring of Adam had not the original sin and the fall into the phallic form of conception arisen.

The peculiar idiom of describing the treasury of souls as a "body" may be connected to the mythic tradition of Adam Kadmon, the primordial man. Adam Kadmon, God's "original intention" for humanity, was a supernal being, androgynous and macro-cosmic (co-equal in size with the universe). When this Adam sinned, humanity was demoted to the flesh and blood, bifurcated and mortal creatures we are now.

Wikipedia, Guf.​



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The term, "in Christ" occurs almost 100 times in the NT. It's seminal to the concept of being a "Christian" that a Christian is "in Christ." St. Paul claims, in Ephesians chapter one, that all Christians are "in Christ" prior to the original sin that causes the fall of Adam. In a sense, all Christians were in Adam prior to the inception of the phallic form of conception. All these souls were trapped in the flesh of Adam and all of his phallic offspring until the birth of the first son of Abraham not conceived phallically. As the true circumcision, he becomes the second Adam, who contains, as the first Adam did, all the souls slated to have been born as the spiritual offspring of Adam had not the original sin and the fall into the phallic form of conception arisen.

In this sense, Christ is the guf גוף or gewiya גויה, i.e., the tree of life, where all the spiritual souls (a fixed number) exist that were created in Adam from the get-go. That he became a corpse before he birthed a single one of the souls segues too nicely into the Jewish concept that this store of spiritual souls is in fact a corpse.

Then you will say in your heart, who has begotten these for me, since I have been bereaved of my children and am barren, an exile and wanderer? And who has reared these? Behold, I was left alone; From where did these come?

Isaiah 49:21.​



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In this sense, Christ is the guf גוף or gewiya גויה, i.e., the tree of life, where all the spiritual souls (a fixed number) exist that were created in Adam from the get-go. That he became a corpse before he birthed a single one of the souls segues too nicely into the Jewish concept that this store of spiritual souls is in fact a corpse.

Then you will say in your heart, who has begotten these for me, since I have been bereaved of my children and am barren, an exile and wanderer? And who has reared these? Behold, I was left alone; From where did these come?

Isaiah 49:21.​

Ibn Ezra concurs with Rabbi Hirsch that Psalms 110:6 speaks of the messianic king/priest coming to judge the world having "bodies" (corpses) within, or with him:

Our verse should be understood as follows: "God will judge among the nations. He that has bodies(38) ---that is, the One who has a great host(39) ----will execute judgment upon the nations".​

Note #38 says, "In other words, geviyot is understood as `live bodies' (see Gen. 47:18), not dead bodies." And note #39 says, "The reference is to a host of angels or a human army --- Filwarg." ------Problem being that properly exegeted Genesis 47:18 speaks of "corpses" not living bodies. There's nowhere in the Tanakh that would justify reading Psalms 110:6 as anything other than that messiah will be, and come back to judge as, a resurrected corpse, accompanied by all those spiritual souls that were in him (that is "in Chirst") when he became a corpse, and which were thereafter distributed to the natural-born sons of the first Adam by means of a supernatural rebirth.

In B. Avodah Zarah 5a, Resh Lakish, an important talmudic sage, is quoted as saying, "The Messiah will only come when all the souls destined to inhabit earthly bodies have been exhausted." Rashi, commenting on this,says that, "There is a treasury house called the Guf, and at the time of Creation all souls destined to be born were formed and placed there." This treasure house is said to contain souls created since the six days of Creation, which are being saved for bodies yet to be created. It is also described in B. Yevamot 63b as located behind the heavenly curtain known as the Parod, where "there are spirits and souls created since the six days of Creation that are intended for bodies yet to be created.

Howard Schwartz, Tree of Souls, p. 166-167.​



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Ibn Ezra concurs with Rabbi Hirsch that Psalms 110:6 speaks of the messianic king/priest coming to judge the world having "bodies" (corpses) within, or with him:

Our verse should be understood as follows: "God will judge among the nations. He that has bodies(38) ---that is, the One who has a great host(39) ----will execute judgment upon the nations".​

Note #38 says, "In other words, geviyot is understood as `live bodies' (see Gen. 47:18), not dead bodies." And note #39 says, "The reference is to a host of angels or a human army --- Filwarg." ------Problem being that properly exegeted Genesis 47:18 speaks of "corpses" not living bodies. There's nowhere in the Tanakh that would justify reading Psalms 110:6 as anything other than that messiah will be, and come back to judge as, a resurrected corpse, accompanied by all those spiritual souls that were in him (that is "in Chirst") when he became a corpse, and which were thereafter distributed to the natural-born sons of the first Adam by means of a supernatural rebirth.

In B. Avodah Zarah 5a, Resh Lakish, an important talmudic sage, is quoted as saying, "The Messiah will only come when all the souls destined to inhabit earthly bodies have been exhausted." Rashi, commenting on this,says that, "There is a treasury house called the Guf, and at the time of Creation all souls destined to be born were formed and placed there." This treasure house is said to contain souls created since the six days of Creation, which are being saved for bodies yet to be created. It is also described in B. Yevamot 63b as located behind the heavenly curtain known as the Parod, where "there are spirits and souls created since the six days of Creation that are intended for bodies yet to be created.

Howard Schwartz, Tree of Souls, p. 166-167.​



John

The quotation found in Howard Schwartz', Tree of Souls, requires some explanation and clarification. In the NT, Jesus is referred to as the veil in the holy temple (the "paroket") separating the holy place from the most holy place. This veil, paralleling the virginal veil of the bride, is torn, at his death, allowing the souls hidden there (the heavenly realm) since "before the foundation of the world" to be freed to enter into the temporal dimension.

We were chosen in him ["in Christ"] before the καταβολης of the world so that we might be holy and pure before him in love since we were predestined as the adopted children of Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 1:4-5.​

Whereas the Talmud, and Rashi, speak of these sacred souls being created after the six days of creation, Paul says they were created prior to the katabole (casting down) of the creation. Paul's statement adheres to the "gap" theology that sees a fall occurring between the initial creation of the all things ----in perfection (Genesis 1:1) ----followed by "chaos" (between verses 1 and 2 of Genesis chapter one) after which the six days of creation restore the earth to some semblance of its pre-catastrophic state. In Paul's theology, the souls in the tree of soul were in him, "in Christ" waiting to be born prior to the catastrophe that's labeled the "falling down" (katabole) of the world. Paul is saying that the souls stored in the tree of souls were stored there from the beginning of creation and not afterward. They were created simultaneous to prelapsarian-Adam (Adam Kadmon), and not after the fact (ala the Talmud).

Paul's concept of "adoption" into Christ implies that those who are born into the fall by means of being conceived through phallic-sex, fleshly being, are, by means of rebirth, adopted into the family of God and immediately given one of the souls stored in the Guf, the tree of souls, from before the "foundation" (katabole) of the world. The Christian is born the first time into, and through, the original sin of phallic-sex, so that they must be adopted into the body of Christ, the family of God, and given a new soul through some mechanism distinct from the phallic-sex that entered them into the realm of the dead.



John
 
Last edited:
Top