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

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

Gnostic Bishop

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
2,747
Why was Adam exempt from the transgression when the transgression was disobedience?

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy2:11-14)

I think that Adam, not being deceived, was more culpable than Eve.

Why then did God favor the guiltiest, Adam, with, --- he shall rule over you?

Men rule over women? Why when men were not deceived butdisobeyed?

What was the transgression, --- if not a wise decision to choose knowledge and wisdom and shun immortality of the flesh, --- even if that were possible, --- and why was Adan not punished as hard as Eve when he was clearly more guilty?

Regards
DL
 
Last edited:
Never mind. The Old Testament has nothing to do with the reality of God and isn't relevant to anything. It was created by a more advanced species posing as gods and seeking to control humanity. The New Testament, or the teachings Jesus tried to bring is better, but even those have been fucked with.

I once read how Jesus was upset about the brutal and judgemental God he was taught about. But as he travelled the world and studied religious writings in places such as Egypt (The Library of Alexandria still hadn't been burnt) he gradually started getting a glimpse of a mild face or a God of pure love and foregiveness.

So that's what he tried to teach, but they changed a lot of his teachings to fit in with the Old Testament, which is barbarous.
 
So Adam and Eve are the same. Rib, blah, blah, blah. *An interesting side note artists depictions of Adam and Eve is that they always have a belly button :P

You have a reoccurring theme in all your posts and objections and you use the same quote "He shall rule over you". Do you feel as though you lack authority within yourself so you must project this argument (or I am the one projecting some sort of Lack)? However I don't like Old Timothy but nevertheless...Was the real transgression the Desire to do that which was forbidden? Through this breach of contract were we not hurled off to then fend for ourselves? That's the best part about the Fall. It's that the umbilical cord was cut from Man. There is no guarantee of Eden, no guarantee of eternal peace. You are to do the best with what you have. *I used to think it was a different metaphor but learning is a continuous thing. One must always read the Bible carefully.

Adam_Eve_Expelled_Charles-Joseph-Natoire.jpg
 
Last edited:
Never mind. The Old Testament has nothing to do with the reality of God and isn't relevant to anything. It was created by a more advanced species posing as gods and seeking to control humanity. The New Testament, or the teachings Jesus tried to bring is better, but even those have been fucked with.

I once read how Jesus was upset about the brutal and judgemental God he was taught about. But as he travelled the world and studied religious writings in places such as Egypt (The Library of Alexandria still hadn't been burnt) he gradually started getting a glimpse of a mild face or a God of pure love and foregiveness.

So that's what he tried to teach, but they changed a lot of his teachings to fit in with the Old Testament, which is barbarous.

The winners write history and Rome won. They took a freedom fighter and made him into a Roman ass kisser.

Regards
DL
 
So Adam and Eve are the same. Rib, blah, blah, blah. *An interesting side note artists depictions of Adam and Eve is that they always have a belly button :P

You have a reoccurring theme in all your posts and objections and you use the same quote "He shall rule over you". Do you feel as though you lack authority within yourself so you must project this argument? However I don't like Old Timothy but nevertheless...Was the real transgression the Desire to do that which was forbidden? Through this breach of contract were we not hurled off to then fend for ourselves? That's the best part about the Fall. It's that the umbilical cord was cut from Man. There is no guarantee of Eden, no guarantee of eternal peace. You are to do the best with what you have. You are to wrestle with desires that will lead into conflicts, etc, etc. *I used to think it was a different metaphor but learning is a continuous thing. One must always read the Bible carefully.

Adam_Eve_Expelled_Charles-Joseph-Natoire.jpg

You did not want to touch that part about Adam I see.

Not surprised.

Regards
DL
 
Official Christianity was mostly created for social, political, and financial control, not to uplift us spiritually. It shouldn't be that hard to work out, should it? Starting to get sick of all the simple minds who wine about Christianity or organised religion in general.

There's not much of spiritual value in it, and never has been, because that's not what it was created for. People were burned at the stake for not complying with it and that should tell you something. All the major religions are basically vehicles for social control, that's their main purpose. Sure, we have some gems too, like The Sermon on the Mount in The New Testament, but most of it is pretty shitty.

But I find people like these are generally not very spiritual, anyway, and just looking for any excuse to disprove this dimension of life (even if they haven't studied it in much depth). Or why focus on the main world religions which has the least value?
 
You did not want to touch that part about Adam I see.

Not surprised.

Regards
DL

No I did. Man Fell because of Desire. I had to edit out 'wrestle with desires which lead to conflict' --which is the story but ultimately unnecessary. Christ comes to redeem the conflict of Desire saying it can be overcome, etc, etc, etc. So for instance the Desire to persecute, this is a conflict that is unnecessary. However you had Jews who persecuted Christians, then you had Christians persecuting Jews, which is why I am a pessimist and with Augustine. Man cannot overcome Original Sin.
 
No I did. Man Fell because of Desire. I had to edit out 'wrestle with desires which lead to conflict' --which is the story but ultimately unnecessary. Christ comes to redeem the conflict of Desire saying it can be overcome, etc, etc, etc. So for instance the Desire to persecute, this is a conflict that is unnecessary. However you had Jews who persecuted Christians, then you had Christians persecuting Jews, which is why I am a pessimist and with Augustine. Man cannot overcome Original Sin.

I was speaking to the fact that God let him off so much easier than he did women.

Regards
DL
 
Men rule over women? Why when men were not deceived butdisobeyed?

Whilst I don't know if you are simply asking rhetorical questions or if you do desire (halfassed) answers; but I would suggest that the real reason behind the 'plot' of this story lies with the biases and proclivities of its human author. It doesn't really seem to truly describe an actual event or occurrence in its outcomes but of course its symbolism could be used to describe the hypothesised 'ground zero' point of the anatomically modern human awakening to full cultural 'modernity' sometime around 50,000 years ago. Some evolutionary biologists think that females actually developed speech and therefore the means to both internally articulate complex ideas and then communicate and disseminate them- a possible eating of the apple- before males. A patriarchal society may try to obscure the truth of the emergence of self if the truth was not the right one. Speculation of course...
 
It's a metaphor for humanity's Fall from 5fth to 3rd dimension. The apple represents the 3rd dimension we were tempted to explore because we were curious and bored of Heaven. Eve represents our feminine side that gave into the temptation.

It was a fall in consciousness. Most religious teachings are written in metaphor and minsinterprated. Or the real meaning is esoteric and only available to a few (not the masses).
 
Whilst I don't know if you are simply asking rhetorical questions or if you do desire (halfassed) answers; but I would suggest that the real reason behind the 'plot' of this story lies with the biases and proclivities of its human author. It doesn't really seem to truly describe an actual event or occurrence in its outcomes but of course its symbolism could be used to describe the hypothesised 'ground zero' point of the anatomically modern human awakening to full cultural 'modernity' sometime around 50,000 years ago. Some evolutionary biologists think that females actually developed speech and therefore the means to both internally articulate complex ideas and then communicate and disseminate them- a possible eating of the apple- before males. A patriarchal society may try to obscure the truth of the emergence of self if the truth was not the right one. Speculation of course...

Yes but we do know that the Goddess' ruled for 20,000 years before man developed weapons to kill each other with. The Bronze Age showed man starting to make defendable cities while before, defences were not required.

I ask question on Genesis because Christians have used it forever to bludgeon women into submission to men.

Regards
DL
 
It's a metaphor for humanity's Fall from 5fth to 3rd dimension. The apple represents the 3rd dimension we were tempted to explore because we were curious and bored of Heaven. Eve represents our feminine side that gave into the temptation.

It was a fall in consciousness. Most religious teachings are written in metaphor and minsinterprated. Or the real meaning is esoteric and only available to a few (not the masses).

No argument.

But as stated above, men have been using the myth against women forever.

Literalism is the cause of much evil.

Regards
DL
 
Impressed you could understand that, as most wouldn't.

I also like your handle, as Gnostic Christianity is the only religion I can somewhat embrace, mostly because of the true nature of Christ which will blow anyone away when they get it.

Have you read about the Cathars and their ballads and Peter Deunov?
 
Impressed you could understand that, as most wouldn't.

I also like your handle, as Gnostic Christianity is the only religion I can somewhat embrace, mostly because of the true nature of Christ which will blow anyone away when they get it.

Have you read about the Cathars and their ballads and Peter Deunov?

I know a bit of the history. No ballads though. Peter Deunov I know a bit and note that he has a fair bit of woo to his views.

I am not into woo.

Tell me what you see as the nature of Christ.

Some see Jesus and the Christ as two different entities.

Regards
DL
 
"Christ" I see as the Higher Self of Jesus, who lives in Heaven at one with God and all that is, and can be all places at the same time. The one who comes to you when you call for him for help and healing. And he has a very holy, divine energy about him.

The individual soul of Christ is always said to be the Master known as "Sananda", so I guess you might have to trust in that.

Jesus I see as simply one of endless incarnations of that one soul, but a very special one, that was a reat co-operation of many beings.

I also think he can incarnate in many bodies at the same time by splitting off different soul-fragments and you wouldn't probably suspect it was him (one of them I've heard is here in a very crucial position right now but don't feel I should mention his identity). I think in his lifetime as Jesus he incarnated with his full soul, though, as it was so important.

This is also an interesting read that rings quite true:

http://www.whoneedslight.org/page/482381728.html

I agree Peter Deunov has very high standards but he's the best teacher I have found so far and his only goal was to become like Christ so you can't really argue with that.

His follower, who released many books was worse, or more judgemental and depressing. But he had an enormous amount to teach (Omraam Mikhaél Aivanhöv).

Esoteric Christianity is so beautiful and enlightening but so few have even heard about it, all the know is The Bible.
 
Ninae


Thanks for that.

The esoteric Jesus I know is not like that other one. Way too much woo has to be swallowed along with him.

Stay closer to earth with me and this Jesus.



You seem to be going way out there to find God while Jesus tells you to go inwards.

I can vouch for that method. Not yours though. But good seeking regardless.

Regards
DL

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

Yes but we do know that the Goddess' ruled for 20,000 years before man developed weapons to kill each other with. The Bronze Age showed man starting to make defendable cities while before, defences were not required.

I ask question on Genesis because Christians have used it forever to bludgeon women into submission to men.

Regards
DL

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