• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe

Why was Adam exempt from the transgression when the transgression was disobedience?

After surveying the most ancient records and clues from the very, very distant past, I have this sinking feeling that women used to run the show and men were their somewhat less important co-rulers. Something went wrong or there was abuse, and the tides turned against women. I look at the story of Adam and Eve as relating that history in order to seek vengeance upon women. But to be fair, I don't know what that story looks like in the original Koine or Aramaic. The modern western translations are pretty convoluted at this point.

It just doesn't make sense that women would be scorned so badly by God in the story, or have this lasting legacy as humanity's burden, unless there was good reason for it far more distantly than we have access to knowing about.

However... following occam's razor, it's far more likely that the authors of the Bible were just big old misogynists. You don't see this crap about women coming up in the Pali canon of Buddhism, or Daoist texts. Men everywhere were always somewhat possessive of women but the Abrahamic faiths raised it to an art form.
 
I think part of it might have been that the most ancient civilisations (like Pangea or "The Garden of Eden") had a very peaceful culture that had an emphasis on love, and mutual support and co-operation, and were very anti-war-like at first.

The men were probably much more feminine and maybe held feminine values higher than masculine values. Maybe that is why they accepted or wanted women as their leaders, as they saw they had more strengths there, while they had some weaknesses like more aggressiveness.

I can imagine men like that could have been completely happy with this arrangement. They maybe saw it as a way of protecting their civilisation from being destroyed (like so many has been since men took over).
 
Ninae said:
There is also a lot of "woo" in this world and human existance, though, and I guess it's only natural for him to sometimes address it.

Jesus' teachings vary a lot, though. Sometimes he comes down very hard with judgement on us and demand perfect purity and point out the consequence when if we fail. While at other times he's more positive and just speaks about God's endless love and forgiveness and that all will be well, etc.

Yes, I tend to learn more from my spiritual role-models than myself. That's what I mean by becoming a better mystic. When you can make a direct connection from within it's like nothing else. Anyway, feeling Jesus' presence and his healing power flowing through you (when I have that privilige) I also count as a mystical experience as it's basically generated from within.
Click to expand...

Getting close but no cigar yet.



Regards
DL
 
willow11 said:
^That is simply not Jesus actively changing but the varying authors of his posthumous works mixing up their sources.



20,000 years before we began making weapons was 20,000 years before homo-sapiens emerged. :\ Its what we do.
Click to expand...

We emerged way before that.

Regards
DL
 
Foreigner said:
After surveying the most ancient records and clues from the very, very distant past, I have this sinking feeling that women used to run the show and men were their somewhat less important co-rulers. Something went wrong or there was abuse, and the tides turned against women. I look at the story of Adam and Eve as relating that history in order to seek vengeance upon women. But to be fair, I don't know what that story looks like in the original Koine or Aramaic. The modern western translations are pretty convoluted at this point.

It just doesn't make sense that women would be scorned so badly by God in the story, or have this lasting legacy as humanity's burden, unless there was good reason for it far more distantly than we have access to knowing about.

However... following occam's razor, it's far more likely that the authors of the Bible were just big old misogynists. You don't see this crap about women coming up in the Pali canon of Buddhism, or Daoist texts. Men everywhere were always somewhat possessive of women but the Abrahamic faiths raised it to an art form.
Click to expand...

I think that further back, if I can say it this way, man ruled for woman's sake and he set her above him as a part of his duty to family and community.

In our so called civilized societies, man seems to be ruling for his own sake and has forgotten his first duty. Family. We want to glorify ourselves and not family.

Regards
DL
 
This Earth is billions of years old - it's just a story of the rise and fall of many civilisations.

Like, after the fall of Atlantis, men lived as "Cavemen" for a while because they'd lost all they had, but they weren't the primitive animals we imagine (or have been taught).
 
Ninae said:
I think part of it might have been that the most ancient civilisations (like Pangea or "The Garden of Eden") had a very peaceful culture that had an emphasis on love, and mutual support and co-operation, and were very anti-war-like at first.

The men were probably much more feminine and maybe held feminine values higher than masculine values. Maybe that is why they accepted or wanted women as their leaders, as they saw they had more strengths there, while they had some weaknesses like more aggressiveness.

I can imagine men like that could have been completely happy with this arrangement. They maybe saw it as a way of protecting their civilisation from being destroyed (like so many has been since men took over).
Click to expand...

Sorry to say that I think it was because women had wombs and breasts and men did not. If a man wanted children as we are driven to by instincts, then protection of the baby and breast became paramount. That is why all the oldest statues found accentuate the breasts and vulva.

Regards
DL
 
In the Caveman erea, men were still mostly 5th dimensional beings and could slip in and out of the physical plane at will. They were just playing with Earthly life. It didn't really matter what happened there.
 
Ninae said:
In the Caveman erea, men were still mostly 5th dimensional beings and could slip in and out of the physical plane at will. They were just playing with Earthly life. It didn't really matter what happened there.
Click to expand...

That does not speak to that clip.

That aside, how can you know that the cavemen where doing as you say?
How do you know what you say is a fact?

Regards
DL
 
Last edited:
Precisely because of the violence that human experienced from their co-human. That is the reason humans always made weapon to defend themselves and property.
 
willow11 said:
My point was that humans have always made weapons; there exists no pre-weapon era for us.
Click to expand...

I agree. We just improved them during the Bronze Age and started using them against ourselves whereas before, we did not. Although I would think that there were raiding parties looking for women. We cannot know just how much killing went on then but our instinct default to cooperation because that has a better survival chance.

Regards
DL
 
charleton said:
Precisely because of the violence that human experienced from their co-human. That is the reason humans always made weapon to defend themselves and property.
Click to expand...

Now yes. in ancient days property, before the Bronze Age was not as big an issue until farming settled people in a given location.

Regards
DL
 
willow11 said:
My point was that humans have always made weapons; there exists no pre-weapon era for us.
Click to expand...

?

How can you know that when there are ancient great continents and civilizations that have come and gone (if you look outside our modern history books)? Where did the myth of "The Garden of Eden" come from?
 
Pangaea was mostly from before even the long age of dinosaurs. Mammals didn't even evolve for many millions of years after Pangaea had already split into different continents, which further split into the continents we have today, let alone humans. Humans have been around in relatively modern for 2 million years or so. Additionall, 250 million years ago, during the time of Pangaea, 90% of the life on Earth died out suddenly and it took a long time to pick back up steam.

No humans even came close to existing on Pangaea. The evolutionary time period required for our immensely complex brains, our warm-blooded bodies, and our many other advanced features did not exist then either. Not on Earth.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top