Re: ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
paganprophet said:
Only the Gnostics knew the truth of Genesis 3:3-4
that must be why they were such a huge success, still exist in such large numbers and are so influential nowadays.
Haven't any of you noticed the change of God's name and the whole tone of difference between the God of Genesis I and the god of Genesis II?
it may have escaped your attention, pp, but this was the founding myth of the "documentary hypothesis". we are well aware of it and i would make the same answer to you that i make to everyone - my auntie is also my cousin's mother, my uncle's wife and a grandmother to her grandchildren. each of us call her something different and she is different things to all of us, yet astonishingly, she manages to be just one person.
Elohim vs. Yahweh is what's going on.
in the sense of the
midot, perhaps. if you look at the context, you will see that every time the E-Name is used, it is in a context of Divine Judgement, yet when the Y-Name is used, it is in a context of Divine Mercy. and have you noticed the combined name in 2:4-9, 2:15-16, 2:18-19, 2:21-22, 3:1, 3:8-9 and 3:13-14, 3:21-23? we have, many centuries ago.
Jesus tried to tell you and yet Christianity went on its merry way following the Jewish traditions with Paul and then Augustine expanding the idea of Original Sin to separate human beings from their Source in Elohim.
except that judaism has no concept of "original sin".
...such as?
But that's another thread topic, why the god of Genesis II needed to lie to the human beings he supposedly created. Neither Adam or Eve died when they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. "but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the DAY that you eat of it you shall surely die.
i'd spit, but i'm too busy laughing. *that's* your criticism? *that's* your exegesis? hur, hur, hur. adam and eve could not die *in the garden*. mortals cannot live *in the garden*. to be human is to be mortal. to be able to live with the knowledge that your actions have consequences is the quintessence of mortality. when they chose choice, they chose mortality. an immortal could not exist within the framework of normal causality - i mean, what would happen if someone chopped his head off? what would stop him smoking a thousand cigarettes a day? would causality be suspended? what adam and eve chose was the *ability to learn and through it, to change and develop*. G!D does not change. it was the serpent that lied and told them that they would be "like G!D" - they might have thought that, but the downside would be realising that with their new knowledge, their new freedom, came consequences and a price.
Why would a god who created lesser beings and supposedly controlled everything about that creation of them get mad at these beings he himself has created and is responsible for what they are? That is not a very psychologically healthy god to say the least..this sets the tone for worshiping something less than Goodness as God.
read the text again, mate. nowhere does it say that G!D Was Angry. G!D Gets Angry, sure, it's quite common later on, but not here. would you get angry at a baby for dirtying its nappy? there is nothing in the text to support this assertion - it's simply a lot of gnostic fidgie-widgieness.
b'shalom
bananabrain
