Marriage

bast3.jpg

I've always wondered how Egyptians came to tell this version of the story. For the present I assume it is another version of the original Genesis story. Some scholars propose this imagery is older than that of Genesis, but I think theirs is the bigger assumption. The symbols used are similar in each, since Bast the female goddess represents wisdom in Egyptian traditions while in Judaism wisdom is seen as a woman. (Perhaps wisdom found herself growing the head of a cat in order to express some philosophical aspect of wisdom, but I'm just trying to impart the gist of how it seems to me.) There are interpretations of Egyptian lore that say the gods and goddesses were developed to explain facets of the Divine. To me, this sounds similar to the concept of names or titles of the L!RD in Judaism. I think the biggest difference between the Egyptian and Mosaic approaches is the absence of images in Judaism and the fact there are not separate priesthoods for the facets of the Divine. Since the Egyptians had an entire priesthood for each god or goddess, the tendency was to embellish and extend. In both representations, there is a serpent, a tree, and a wisdom as female somehow involved in the destruction of the serpent's head. I admit I'm speculating, but that admission strengthens my argument. I think that the practical power of monotheism is still in progress, gradually destroying the human justification of the abuses of religious power. I see in Christianity and Judaism supreme arguments against any central religious authority, and all of them woven with the imagery of the Garden of Eden.
 
Having said all of that, I don't know much about the meaning of the tree and serpent in Egyptology. Its all a wild guess, except that the imagery is extremely similar and the Israelites really did come out of Egypt. According to the account in Genesis, they picked up Egyptian habits and gods while they were in Egypt and had to forget about them after they left.
 
Dream said:
bast3.jpg

I've always wondered how Egyptians came to tell this version of the story. For the present I assume it is another version of the original Genesis story. Some scholars propose this imagery is older than that of Genesis, but I think theirs is the bigger assumption. The symbols used are similar in each, since Bast the female goddess represents wisdom in Egyptian traditions while in Judaism wisdom is seen as a woman. (Perhaps wisdom found herself growing the head of a cat in order to express some philosophical aspect of wisdom, but I'm just trying to impart the gist of how it seems to me.) There are interpretations of Egyptian lore that say the gods and goddesses were developed to explain facets of the Divine. To me, this sounds similar to the concept of names or titles of the L!RD in Judaism. I think the biggest difference between the Egyptian and Mosaic approaches is the absence of images in Judaism and the fact there are not separate priesthoods for the facets of the Divine. Since the Egyptians had an entire priesthood for each god or goddess, the tendency was to embellish and extend. In both representations, there is a serpent, a tree, and a wisdom as female somehow involved in the destruction of the serpent's head. I admit I'm speculating, but that admission strengthens my argument. I think that the practical power of monotheism is still in progress, gradually destroying the human justification of the abuses of religious power. I see in Christianity and Judaism supreme arguments against any central religious authority, and all of them woven with the imagery of the Garden of Eden.
Click to expand...

Apep, the serpent of chaos, was supposed to be slain every night so the sun could rise in the morning, since he tried to interfere with Ra's night time journey through the underworld. Many different gods and goddesses, including Set, took turns slaying Apep, not just Bastet.
 
Here's a tiny quote from "touregypt.net" :
This brief overview is meant only to explain some of the basic concepts and to introduce some of the gods. Religion in ancient Egypt was not unlike modern times. Today, not everyone believes in the same way, or of the same god. Egypt was no different. Individual kings worshipped their own gods, as did the workers, priests, merchants and peasants. Pre-dynastic Egypt had formulated the ideas and beliefs of a "greater being", which was expressed in pictures, but some scholars suggest that "writing" was invented in order to communicate spiritual thoughts to the masses. Now the pictures had ideas, and took on human traits. The gods lived, died, hunted, went into battle, gave birth, ate, drank, and had human emotions. The gods reigns overlapped, and, in some instances, merged. Their was no organized hierarchy structure of their reign. The dominance of the gods depended on the beliefs of the reigning king.
Click to expand...
 
awesome posts thomas and dream.

the Genesis account of Adam and Eve is amongst my favorite stories in the bible because they explain so much of why man is puddy in the hands of a woman. i too see that when God asks Adam and Eve about what they had done, that they blamed each other. this account reminds me so much of children blaming each other. i had always thought that Adam and Eve were literally small children at the point they ate the fruit. but that is my opinion.anyhow, they did try to hide from God's Voice walking in the garden (that is amazing! even though it doesn't make sense.) but for naught, of course. that is why i don't see that they were confessing because they were trying to hide to begin with.

but, is it me or was the serpent telling the truth? he (he? what the heck am i saying. "it", no? aaaah i don't know. anyways...) said that if they ate of the fruit, that they would be like God, knowing good and evil. what is wrong with that? to me it explains why we aren't in the 7th day of God's rest because we aren't in His image yet. at the end of the 6th day, we will finally be in His image. meaning He isn't done creating man in His image yet (confusing, i know, but i can't find any other way for it to make sense). so until man can finally make the true distinction of good and evil, then and only then will we finally be in His image. when we can finally judge just like God would judge. because our judgments are just poor. they are not like God's judgments, otherwise, it would be a heavenly kingdom on earth.

it is so interesting how Eve convinces Adam to eat the fruit. i read in a book once called the book of Adam and Eve where it says that they both in the beginning were like the angels of heaven. full of glory and light. but as soon as they took of the fruit, they became like the beasts of the earth. just brutish and just animal-like. in my thoughts, Adam felt sorry for Eve. in Adams wisdom, He would do what God would do, be there for his wife, instead of just abandoning her. he would stick by her side until the end because he loved her that much that he would sacrifice himself so that she wouldn't be alone. dang it, the trinity kinda makes sense if looked at this perspective (bear with me guys, all of this is just dawning on me. amazing...).

i can agree with the serpent being the inner inclination of the sin of man. not literally being a snake but something like an inner voice within the sons of man. after all, the snake in many ancient cultures for one reason or another represent wisdom. and to top it off, females at a younger age become mature mentally. in other words, females wise up first for some reason. but to me Genesis explains this very well.

but i don't see the curse as a punishment. but as a means to an end. the only way we can ever be like God is by knowing good or evil. there is no other way to find peace. its heartbreaking that the sons of man have to suffer and die, but we brought this on ourselves. God in His wisdom, knew this would happen. this is a lesson in discipline but it is also a means to become one with Him. which other way could there be? but to go through the fire and be cleansed. it'll hurt, but it is just for a short while. at least in God's Eyes, anyways.
 
Thomas said:
Originally Posted by Dream
We know that the story of the Garden of Eden is a picture of marriage.
Click to expand...
Thomas said:
Thomas
Do we ... where is that taught? I would rather think the story of the Garden of Eden is the story of Innocence, which would preclude marriage ... marriage in a sense implies possession, a relation between two that excludes all others ... So it might well be that marriage is a post-Fall condition, that won't apply in Heaven, because marriage, like the Law, is a necessity for man bound in sin. That's why the Law allowed divorce, because man was incapable of keeping his word, and that's why so many divorce today ... because man is incapable of keeping his word.
Click to expand...
Ok. Its a little bit ambitious to say 'we' when its only my opinion. Sorry.
 
Did you know... That when you have your wedding via registary...(not in a church) They forbid you to have any music or reference to YHWH....

"Oh just to let you know.. It can't have anything to do with god..."

me: "lol.... What doesn't have something to do with god?"
 
I have thought about this and developed a sort of theory.

Man and Woman both make up characteristics of God that the other does not have. Man is the logical thinker while the woman is the emotional giver. So when the two form a union under God they become one flesh or make up a whole of the image of God that we are created with. I believe that when we receive our new bodies that we will be whole within ourselves because we will be as Christ is. I believe Jesus on earth was the sum of both parts which allowed him to feel so thoroughly during His ministry while He was able to think and reason logically.

Anyways I don’t know this for fact this is something that I just entertained during one of my fanciful moments.
 
Alex P said:
Did you know... That when you have your wedding via registary...(not in a church) They forbid you to have any music
Click to expand...

Deffo not true Alex. I've been to plenty of registry office weddings and they INVARIABLY have had music. :)

Usually bad music, IMO :D

s.
 
Faithfulservant said:
Man is the logical thinker
Click to expand...

I shall tell my partner this, fs, to see if she agrees. I'll probably tell her from a safe distance though! ;)

s.
 
Snoopy said:
I shall tell my partner this, fs, to see if she agrees. I'll probably tell her from a safe distance though! ;)

s.
Click to expand...
Unlike women who can use both sides of their brain at any given moment, man (physically) can not. That is fact. We either use logic, or use emotion, but we can not do both simultaneously.

The advantage is that man can become a machine, then go to pieces later. The advantage for women is that they can balance the two at any moment.

That's why moms are better at rearing kids, than dads, but dads are better at raising adults than moms...

I'll also point out that girls and boys get their cues from dad, when it comes to marriage. In other words, girls look at dads and from their determine what kind of man they will marry. Boys look at dads and from their, determine just how they will treat their wives...

Both will look at mom and determine, how a child should be nurtured and raised from infancy.
 
Snoopy said:
Deffo not true Alex. I've been to plenty of registry office weddings and they INVARIABLY have had music. :)

Usually bad music, IMO :D

s.
Click to expand...

What? You being totally serious? Because I was told in no way, at all, can the music at the wedding part... Do you I do do you I do... HEre comes the bride da da da.. That part... No way... At all any reference to god..... I was made clear of that...... You telling me this person is wrong?? Because we really want to use Amy Grant - O' Master let me walk with thee....
 
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear Alex,

In reponse to your enquiry, the Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved
Premises) Regulations 2005 governs marriage at an Approved Premise in England and Wales.

Schedule 2, Section 11 states as follows :

" 11. (1) Any proceedings conducted on approved premises shall not be religious in nature.
(2) In particular, the proceedings shall not—

(a) include extracts from an authorised religious marriage service or from sacred religious texts;
(b) be led by a minister of religion or other religious leader;
(c) involve a religious ritual or series of rituals;
(d) include hymns or other religious chants; or,
(e) include any form of worship.


(3) But the proceedings may include readings, songs, or music that contain an incidental reference to a god or deity in an essentially non-religious context.

(4) For this purpose any material used by way of introduction to, in any interval between parts of, or by way of conclusion to the proceedings shall be treated as forming part of the proceedings."

I hope this information provides a satisfactory response to your enquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------

What on earth would be incidental reference to a God in a non-religious way??
 
Quahom1 said:
Unlike women who can use both sides of their brain at any given moment, man (physically) can not. That is fact. We either use logic, or use emotion, but we can not do both simultaneously.
Click to expand...

Who established this "fact"? :p
 
Alex P said:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear Alex,

In reponse to your enquiry, the Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved
Premises) Regulations 2005 governs marriage at an Approved Premise in England and Wales.

Schedule 2, Section 11 states as follows :

" 11. (1) Any proceedings conducted on approved premises shall not be religious in nature.
(2) In particular, the proceedings shall not—

(a) include extracts from an authorised religious marriage service or from sacred religious texts;
(b) be led by a minister of religion or other religious leader;
(c) involve a religious ritual or series of rituals;
(d) include hymns or other religious chants; or,
(e) include any form of worship.


(3) But the proceedings may include readings, songs, or music that contain an incidental reference to a god or deity in an essentially non-religious context.

(4) For this purpose any material used by way of introduction to, in any interval between parts of, or by way of conclusion to the proceedings shall be treated as forming part of the proceedings."

I hope this information provides a satisfactory response to your enquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------

What on earth would be incidental reference to a God in a non-religious way??
Click to expand...
Dang Alex! Whatever happened to freedom of religion? :confused:
 
Faithfulservant said:
Man and Woman both make up characteristics of God that the other does not have. ... I believe Jesus on earth was the sum of both parts which allowed him to feel so thoroughly during His ministry while He was able to think and reason logically.
Click to expand...
I thought that was very interesting. The word translated as 'Rib' in the English is usually translated 'side', so you could say that Eve was made from half of Adam possibly. Sometimes I think the reason we were made into two parts is in Ecclesisastes 3:18, but I don't know about that.

Ecc 3:18 I said in my heart with regard to the sons of men that God is testing them to show them that they are but beasts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top