The Fall of Man and Original Sin

[Looncall]

The nature and character of "God" is inherently sexual: you can't separate "God" from sex. The Hebrew word for "God" is Elohim, which is a fusion of 'el' (masculine 'god') and 'elah' (feminine 'goddess') which, when combined, produces elohim (plural) but is technically a singular composite, just as Adam is androgynous. YHVH is similarly a fusion of masculine and feminine (Y-phallus H-ovum V-man H-woman). Intrinsic to these two names is the principle relationship between masculine and feminine.

There are two ways to eat from the tree of knowledge: in the right way which is respecting the sexual act - not spilling the seed in fornication - or in the wrong way which is fornication which leads to animal degeneration and brain deficiency. Lucifer (serpent) is at the foundation of both: only if Lucifer falls (fornication) does he become Satan. The same is true for any being: the choice is purity vs. impurity.

This is accented in the story of Jacob wherein he wrestles with an angel before having his name changed from Jacob to Israel. This "wrestling" was the sexual act wherein Jacob was fighting to prevent spilling of the seed. Because he overcame, Isis(feminine)+Ra(masculine)+El(god) is born which is the same synthesis of Mary and Joseph giving birth to Emanuel which literally means "god within".

Satan is the "shadow" of God; adversary and fallen state of Lucifer (abuse of sexual energy). They are not two separate "things" but reflections of one another. This is highlighted in the book of Job which is the oldest book in the Bible.

I wonder why the religious are so obsessed with sex. Is it because religions use matters around sex to cause morbid guilt in their followers? That must keep the pews and collection plates full.

It sure is productive of fatuous nonsense.

 

[Thief]

with all due respect we are reading mythology here.

you can't have it both ways.....

blood....is a physical item....
made by God

and someone had to be first to walk with God

 

[Thief]

So, your saying that 100% of immorality is due to sex! The water at least means the flesh in general, seeing as to how even God condoned sex:

God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."​

-Genesis 1:28​

this quote was dealt on Day Six.....to Man.....as a species
no names, no garden. no law.....

the garden event happened in Chapter Two
and Chapter Two is not a retelling of Chapter One

 

[9-18-1]

I wonder why the religious are so obsessed with sex. Is it because religions use matters around sex to cause morbid guilt in their followers? That must keep the pews and collection plates full.

It sure is productive of fatuous nonsense.

Religious institutions (Judaism/Christianity/Islam) indeed do use matters around sex to instill guilt/shame into adherents.

However that does not change the fact that creation is based on sex. Taken from the Ark of Noah thread:

LEFT BRAIN: Binah - YHVH Elohim - Logical - Divides - Will to Receive
RIGHT BRAIN: Chokmah - YHVH - Intuition - Unifies - Will to Bestow

Elohim is inherently dual: it necessitates a relationship between masculine and feminine energies in order to "create". It is already explicitly clear in the Hebrew text (and even in the English translations) that Elohim refers to itself as "our" when Adam is made both male and female. If one pays close attention, the days of creation (made by Elohim) always involve a duality (for example):

Genesis 1:3
ויאמראלהים יהיאור ויהיאור
"And GOD said 'let be light,' and light was."
The first is the masculine (+) generating principle "will to bestow" in connection with Chokmah (wisdom)..........YHVH
The second is the feminine (-) dissolving principle "will to receive" in connection with Binah (understanding)......YHVH Elohim

This relationship between the masculine bestowal and feminine reception is precisely why Elohim involves the principle relationship between masculine and feminine energies. This pattern of bestowal followed by reception is common throughout the entire creation account. All of creation is inherently sexual in this way which is the "fire" in the "water" of hashemayim. This is also why on the cross (which contains two beams: upright masculine and horizontal feminine) is the following:

INRI: Ignis Natura Renuvateur Integra
"The fire in nature renews integrally."

The most explicit expression of these two energies interacting (as manifest in/by humans) is the sexual act itself: man becomes erect and willingness to bestow the phallus whereas woman becomes moist and willingness to receive the phallus. This is precisely why Elohim is the relationship between the two and is a singular composite of 'el' (god) and 'elah' (goddess) in precisely the same way life/reproduction can not exist without a man (seed) engaging with a women (womb).

This, in combination with the fact that Genesis 1:1's 28 character string produces a seed-in-womb construct should solidify the notion that any "creation" must necessarily involve the interaction of masculine and feminine energies (seed and womb). The Hebrew word Elohim captures this relationship in itself; YHVH being the perfect singular union of them.

you can't have it both ways.....

blood....is a physical item....
made by God

and someone had to be first to walk with God

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The word ADAM is a composite of aleph=breath and dalet-mem=blood. As such the word ADAM is a reference to any living being which is breathing and has a blood circulation. This indicates any/all human beings.

this quote was dealt on Day Six.....to Man.....as a species
no names, no garden. no law.....

the garden event happened in Chapter Two
and Chapter Two is not a retelling of Chapter One

Actually Chapter 2 is a retelling of Chapter 1 because the structure of the Torah is such:

-All is contained in the first letter 'bait'; if that is not enough
-All is contained in the first word 'b'resheeth'; if that is not enough
-All is contained in the first sentence 'b'resheeth bara elayhim et hashemayim ve'et haaretz'; if that is not enough
-All is contained in the first chapter; if that is not enough
-All is contained within the first book (Genesis / B'resheeth)
-Genesis 1:1=Genesis Chapter 1=Genesis (all)=Torah etc.

Genesis 1:1 produces a fractal image such that as one reads on, one is actually reading a more detailed take on this same fractal image.

As such Genesis Chapter 2 is a retelling of what happens (inside) of Genesis Chapter 1 in a more detailed manner. The entire Torah is like this.

 

[Thief]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The word ADAM is a composite of aleph=breath and dalet-mem=blood. As such the word ADAM is a reference to any living being which is breathing and has a blood circulation. This indicates any/all human beings.

nay.....someone had to be first....to walk with God
and it is written.....Adam was a CHOSEN son of God

makes sense to me

Day Six...Man as a species
and it became obvious .....we would overrun this planet before any proper spirit could 'gel'

a change was needed

so....a chosen specimen and ideal living conditions
a rib taken and cloned
genetic manipulation for the clone to be female

Eve is not born of woman.......no navel

Adam was given his twin sister for a bride

myth?.......I think not

the course of Man was altered.....in the garden

 

[DustyFeet]

I wonder why the religious are so obsessed with sex.

...

i think that physical intimacy can be used for manipulation.

 

[DustyFeet]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

put your "self" in the "shadows"

understanding comes from details and experiences, mighty-one

bee-nah bee-nah bee-nah.... is like a cloud

 

[9-18-1]

put your "self" in the "shadows"

understanding comes from details and experiences, mighty-one

bee-nah bee-nah bee-nah.... is like a cloud

I do but dwell in the shadows
as all is "shadows and dust":
dusk 'til dawn and dawn 'til dusk
(see you now) me then, how,
I till the soil with sweating brow.

 

[DustyFeet]

post #28... i luvit ( not lyle )

 

[InChrist]

As much as one would want this to be true, there is so much in the English translation(s) of the Bible that render some passages completely wrong. This is especially problematic when a mishandling of a word or expression is applied universally throughout the text which modifies it entirely. There are many such cases of this; the first of which is in the very first sentence involving the Hebrew word 'Elohim' rendered as GOD. While the former contains in its construction the unique characteristics of what "GOD" is, the English translation "GOD" carries no such characteristics and has created immense confusion and has given rise to perverse imaginations of what "GOD" actually is.

Nevertheless, whether one understands Hebrew meaning of Elohim or not, the scriptures reveal the meaning throughout ...who GOD is and the characteristics of GOD.

 

[9-18-1]

Nevertheless, whether one understands Hebrew meaning of Elohim or not, the scriptures reveal the meaning throughout ...who GOD is and the characteristics of GOD.

I would only say here that whereas an English reading might give one a blurred obscure vision of what is there, reading in the original language makes it much more focused to such a degree that one can both understand it from a linguistic (language) perspective and a mathematical (numbers) perspective. The latter is only accessible with a Hebrew reading because the Hebrew letters are also (equally) numbers. As such one can analyze the books of Moses numerically to enhance the linguistic reading(s) such that it gives a much more focused and accurate impression of what is actually there.

 

[InChrist]

I would only say here that whereas an English reading might give one a blurred obscure vision of what is there, reading in the original language makes it much more focused to such a degree that one can both understand it from a linguistic (language) perspective and a mathematical (numbers) perspective. The latter is only accessible with a Hebrew reading because the Hebrew letters are also (equally) numbers. As such one can analyze the books of Moses numerically to enhance the linguistic reading(s) such that it gives a much more focused and accurate impression of what is actually there.

You are welcome to your view, of course, but I think God is bigger than any one language and believe He has seen to it that the scriptures and the message He intends people to understand has been made available to people in many numerous languages, without being limited to an exclusive linguistic, mathematical interpretation.

 

[9-18-1]

You are welcome to your view, of course, but I think God is bigger than any one language and believe He has seen to it that the scriptures and the message He intends people to understand has been made available to people in many numerous languages, without being limited to an exclusive linguistic, mathematical interpretation.

Any message is only as potent as the language used to impart it. Consider the following:

The Hebrew language is comprised of 22 letters (27 with final forms). However, the 22 letters are all derived from one single form (bottom left/right):

____________________________________________________
WWW.MERU.ORG

As such the original "meaning" of the Hebrew Bible relies on the understanding of this single form and how it generates each letter in correspondence to a particular meaning.

While it is true that an English translation(s) preserves "some" of the original meaning, it is invariably limited due to the limitation(s) intrinsic to the language itself.

 

[InChrist]

Any message is only as potent as the language used to impart it. Consider the following:

The Hebrew language is comprised of 22 letters (27 with final forms). However, the 22 letters are all derived from one single form (bottom left/right):

____________________________________________________
WWW.MERU.ORG

As such the original "meaning" of the Hebrew Bible relies on the understanding of this single form and how it generates each letter in correspondence to a particular meaning.

While it is true that an English translation(s) preserves "some" of the original meaning, it is invariably limited due to the limitation(s) intrinsic to the language itself.

I think the Hebrew language is a beautiful language and very special because it is the language of God's chosen people, so I really have nothing to debate with you about. I even agree that knowing the language would give deeper insight. Nevertheless, I simply think God is capable and has expressed His salvation message adequately, which is very basic and straightforward, through a variety of languages.