Zeus and Adam.

[John D. Brey]

A study of anthropology, mythology, and Freudian psychology, suggest the narrative come down to modern man as the Torah-text is a particular reading of a subtext, or oral tradition, much older than the Torah-text itself. Throughout ancient mythologies come from all over the world we see concepts of, say, the universal flood, the fall of man, original sin, the birth of a salvific-messianic man/god, born, no less, of virgin credentials. As Freud noted, the passing down of these oral traditions, stories, myths, both inform, and are informed by, the deepest constitution of the human psyche even to include what Jung termed a "collective unconsciousness" structured specifically by ancestral memory and accessed through journeys into the depth of the psych ala depth-psychology (or as the case may be, depth-theology).



John

 

[John D. Brey]

A study of anthropology, mythology, and Freudian psychology, suggest the narrative come down to modern man as the Torah-text is a particular reading of a subtext, or oral tradition, much older than the Torah-text itself. Throughout ancient mythologies come from all over the world we see concepts of, say, the universal flood, the fall of man, original sin, the birth of a salvific-messianic man/god, born, no less, of virgin credentials. As Freud noted, the passing down of these oral traditions, stories, myths, both inform, and are informed by, the deepest constitution of the human psyche even to include what Jung termed a "collective unconsciousness" structured specifically by ancestral memory and accessed through journeys into the depth of the psych ala depth-psychology.

For the serious student of the Torah-text, a remarkable, or even grave, disjuncture between the Torah-text as collective ancestral memory (one myth among a corporate collective of myths) arises when it's noted that almost all ancient mythologies outside the Torah-text possess remarkable marks of similarity (virgin births, universal flood, fall of man, messianic god/man, ect.) whereas that the Jewish version of the universal, collective-memory, sets itself as opposition to the rest of the collective-memory concerning the events and their mythological renditions? When Moses delivers the Torah-text to Israel he implies that it's the correct memory of the prehistoric events, while all the other versions are "pagan" and or "demonic" distortions of the original memory come from whomever handed down the precious history along with the eschatological direction and purpose for the human race.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

For the serious modern student of the Torah-text, a remarkable, or even grave, disjuncture between the Torah-text as collective ancestral memory (one myth among a corporate collective of myths) arises when it's noted that almost all ancient mythologies outside the Torah-text possess remarkable marks of similarity (virgin births, universal flood, fall of man, messianic god/man, ect.) whereas that the Jewish version of the universal, collective-memory, sets itself as opposition to the rest of the collective-memory concerning the events and their mythological renditions? When Moses delivers the Torah-text to Israel he implies that it's the correct memory of the prehistoric events, while all the other versions are "pagan" and or "demonic" distortions of the original memory come from whomever handed down the precious history along with the eschatological direction and purpose for the human race.

Moses gives Israel hyper-xenophobic marching orders concerning the Jewish mythology (don't seek to understand it through, or combine it with, non-Jewish readings of the events). Moses literally litters the seminal Jewish mythology with "decrees" and "signs" which, though they're the fundamental structure through which Israel's myth must be interpreted, are, by Moses' own words, bodies without soul, signs with signification (chok חק or chukkim חקים), whose blood, or significance (required to interpret the mythology) await the arrival of a Jewish messiah, who, when he comes, will make the Jewish mythology interpret-able (i.e., who will lay bare the chukkim/decrees).

According to Moses' dictates, Israel's most direct commandment from God is not to worry about the past, or the future, of mankind, but merely to "guard" שמר the mythology, prehistory and eschatology, precisely until the Jewish messiah arrives to reveal what's hidden in the Jewish psyche, guarded by the Jewish collective, and collective memory, until a preset time when, then, Israel will tell the true story of man's past, present, and future. By Moses decree (from God), Israel guards the accurate truth, unguarded by the goyim (Gentiles), until the one man who, for whatever reason knows the truth of the past, present, and future, gives, reveals, that truth to Israel, after which Israel reveals it, presumably, to the rest of the world.



John

 

[wizanda]

Freudian psychology

I find Freud took too much cocaine, and thus wasn't thinking logically on lots of things.

the birth of a salvific-messianic man/god, born, no less, of virgin credentials.

It is becoming quite a common analysis due to some of the atheistic authors you referenced, that these religious narratives were the same; where I wish more people independently studied the individual religious concepts, and didn't just associate based on partial symbolism.

I believe the Zoroastrian texts, speak about three Saoshyants (Bringers of Truth) being born of a virgin, and the wise men who came from the east to the birth of Yeshua, were likely Zoroastrian priests; fulfilling specific prophecy of fetching gold, frankincense and myrrh... As it was written a bright star would illuminate the birth of a 'Teacher of Righteousness'.

I think from studying many of the ideas, it is more that God keeps sending Divine Beings (Elohim) to interact with mankind as men i.e avatars.

We've lost sight of where religions have often come from, certain beings have been incarnated, with the wisdom, and willingness to inspire others; where many have taught, that life is more valuable than materialism.

If we study why we even know about many of these people with the similar narratives, it is because they were geniuses (inspired by God), where many had reached a level of direct Connection (Yoga) with the Source of reality.

Then some try to work the psychology out in reverse, thinking our universe revolves around our psyche; whereas with enough understanding of theology, we can recognize we're inside the consciousness of God.

In my opinion.

 

[John D. Brey]

Moses gives Israel hyper-xenophobic marching orders concerning the Jewish mythology (don't seek to understand it through, or combine it with, non-Jewish readings of the events). Moses literally liters the seminal Jewish mythology with "decrees" and "signs" which, though they're the fundamental structure through which Israel's myth must be interpreted, are, by Moses' own words, bodies without soul, signs with signification (chok חק or chukkim חקים), whose blood, or significance (required to interpret the mythology) await the arrival of a Jewish messiah, who, when he comes, will make the Jewish mythology interpret-able (i.e., who will lay bare the chukkim/decrees).

According to Moses' dictates, Israel's most direct commandment from God is not to worry about the past, or the future, of mankind, but merely to "guard" שמר the mythology, prehistory and eschatology, precisely until the Jewish messiah arrives to reveal what's hidden in the Jewish psyche, guarded by the Jewish collective, and collective memory, until a preset time when, then, Israel will tell the true story of man's past, present, and future. By Moses decree (from God), Israel guards the accurate truth, unguarded by the goyim (Gentiles), until the one man who, for whatever reason knows the truth of the past, present, and future, gives, reveals, that truth to Israel, after which Israel reveals it, presumably, to the rest of the world.

In the first century of the current era a group of Jews claimed that the person holding the key to the decrees Moses claimed would be deciphered and revealed by Messiah had in fact arrived and given the key to deciphering the depth of the Torah-text (Luke 24:45). For a myriad of reasons this would-be Jewish messiah was rejected by Israel and died the death of a heretic. Nevertheless, his name and fame grew, as did the heretical religion founded in, and grown out of, the soil of the Jewish holy land.

Undeniable truth concerning the fallacious nature of the pseudo-messiah was related, in the eyes of the Jewish sages, to the fact that his birth, and life, far from putting the lie to the pagan myths and religious ideas, seemed to mimic them, parallel them, mirror them. For instance, and perhaps most seminal to all the rest, were two beliefs directly associated with the pseudo-messiah: his ---pagan----virgin birth, and secondly the fact that according to his followers he was a pagan, demigod: a mixture of god and man infleshed, incarnated, in what would preemptively be the most important birth that ever was or will be.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

I find Freud took too much cocaine, and thus wasn't thinking logically on lots of things.

Have you taken cocaine? It's an upper, like caffeine on steroids. Have you ever studied under the influence of caffeine? Do you feel there are coffee stains throughout any study unduly influenced by the demonic bean?

It is becoming quite a common analysis due to some of the atheistic authors you referenced, that these religious narratives were the same; where I wish more people independently studied the individual religious concepts, and didn't just associate based on partial symbolism.

I see it in a diametrically opposite manner. There's only one, actual, Savior, but each and every culture, race, people, clique, want him to look like, sound like, and be like, them, and them alone: cultural, racial, religious, xenophobia. If he tells the culture, race, people, religion, that he came not just for them, but for everyone, they crucify him since they, and they alone, are the chosen ones. How dare he dare to save everyone equally.

This suggests a tripartite division of the historical process. First there is a "preconscious phase" where people do not possess free will but act directly and without reflection upon the gods' commands. A "socially conscious phase" follows, in which free will is regulated via a social contract (the Ten Commandments) pronounced by a human being (Moses) with special abilities to hear God; focus is on the community and ceremonies. In the third phase, a "personally conscious phase," the relationship between man and God is again internal (as in the preconscious phase) but now is conscious: Freewill implies the possibility of sin in mind as well as deed. Polytheistic religions all belong in the first phase, while Judaism and in part, Roman Catholicism belong to the second; Protestantism is a pure cultivation of the third phase.

Tor Norretranders, The User Illusion.​

John

 

[paarsurrey]

Moses gives Israel hyper-xenophobic marching orders concerning the Jewish mythology (don't seek to understand it through, or combine it with, non-Jewish readings of the events). Moses literally liters the seminal Jewish mythology with "decrees" and "signs" which, though they're the fundamental structure through which Israel's myth must be interpreted, are, by Moses' own words, bodies without soul, signs with signification (chok חק or chukkim חקים), whose blood, or significance (required to interpret the mythology) await the arrival of a Jewish messiah, who, when he comes, will make the Jewish mythology interpret-able (i.e., who will lay bare the chukkim/decrees).

According to Moses' dictates, Israel's most direct commandment from God is not to worry about the past, or the future, of mankind, but merely to "guard" שמר the mythology, prehistory and eschatology, precisely until the Jewish messiah arrives to reveal what's hidden in the Jewish psyche, guarded by the Jewish collective, and collective memory, until a preset time when, then, Israel will tell the true story of man's past, present, and future. By Moses decree (from God), Israel guards the accurate truth, unguarded by the goyim (Gentiles), until the one man who, for whatever reason knows the truth of the past, present, and future, gives, reveals, that truth to Israel, after which Israel reveals it, presumably, to the rest of the world.

John

Can one kindly describe the main issue of the thread in a sentence, please? Right?
And, what our beloved (Jesus) Yeshua say about it (quoting his claim as well as gist of his reason), please. Right?

Regards

 

[John D. Brey]

Can one kindly describe the main issue of the thread in a sentence, please?

In a sentence, this thread is about the relationship between Zeus and the first human in the Bible, Adam; and more specifically about Adam's, and Zeus', firstborn sons.

For those willing to read more than a sentence, we can say that until the original sin, Adam appears not to have been strictly mortal himself. It's only after the sin that God kills a mortal creature and gives its flesh to cover up Adam's nakedness after his, Adam's, spiritual covering is removed because of the sin. There's a sense in which the story of Zeus' firstborn son, and the story of Adam's firstborn son, are not just parallel, but where you can't fully understand the nature of Adam's firstborn son, until you're willing to do the hard work of exegeting pagan and Jewish mythology as though they're discussing the same thing.



John

 

[wizanda]

Have you taken cocaine? It's an upper, like caffeine on steroids.

After seeing this where spiders couldn't make a web on coffee, I gave it up... Then had a three day headache from coming off it...

Coffee increases cortisol, and thus our fight or flight response; making us more jittery, and less likely to make a coherent web.

I used to think cocaine was simply a stimulant the same; yet it numbs the flow into the pineal gland, thus causing a quick high...

Thus I find it makes people become more long term paranoid, and less connected empathetically.

How dare he dare to save everyone equally.

Thought it was only those who've listened to Yeshua's words, and acted upon them (Matthew 7:24-27); they will be the ones who are sanctified (Matthew 25:31-46)?

In my opinion.

 

[John D. Brey]

How dare he dare to save everyone equally.
​

Thought it was only those who've listened to Yeshua's words, and acted upon them (Matthew 7:24-27); they will be the ones who are sanctified (Matthew 25:31-46)?

Does that imply to you that only a particular clique are wired to listen to, and act upon, Jesus' words. Or is it the case that all can come (regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, culture, or ethnicity) and take freely of the waters of everlasting life (Revelations 21:6)?




John

 

[John D. Brey]

View attachment 65890

"Some Pig."



John

 

[wizanda]

Does that imply to you that only a particular clique are wired to listen to, and act upon, Jesus' words. Or is it the case that all can come (regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, culture, or ethnicity) and take freely of the waters of everlasting life (Revelations 21:6)?

I think everyone can listen; yet many deafen their ears, by listening in the wrong directions.

Revelation 21:1 is a New Heaven's and New Earth; after the resurrection.

In my opinion.

 

[John D. Brey]

I think everyone can listen; yet many deafen their ears, by listening in the wrong directions.

The primary argument ---so far ----is that the "wrong direction" is to assume that the savior of humanity plays religious, racial, ethnic, sexual, favoritism: he has favorites based not on freewill, or the decisions of the individual, but that he bases his favoritism on who your father is, or if your father wears a religious ring initiating him into a cult, or any other such determinant that forces God's hand to prefer the bearer of certain genes, culture, ethnicity, or religion artifacts or facts.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In a sentence, this thread is about the relationship between Zeus and the first human in the Bible, Adam; and more specifically about Adam's, and Zeus', firstborn sons.

For those willing to read more than a sentence, we can say that until the original sin, Adam appears not to have been strictly mortal himself. It's only after the sin that God kills a mortal creature and gives its flesh to cover up Adam's nakedness after his, Adam's, spiritual covering is removed because of the sin. There's a sense in which the story of Zeus' firstborn son, and the story of Adam's firstborn son, are not just parallel, but where you can't fully understand the nature of Adam's firstborn son, until you're willing to do the hard work of exegeting pagan and Jewish mythology as though they're discussing the same thing.

In one of the most remarkable Jewish polemics against Jesus of Nazareth, Toledot Yeshu, the narrative forgoes the former accusations made by Judaism against Jesus, i.e., that he's a sorcerer using black magic to perform the miracles that seduce his followers, and instead births a new narrative that in effect claims, first, that Jesus did, after all, have supernatural powers, and second, that those powers actually come out of Jewish religion and not from the dark arts.

Toledot Yeshu . . . relates that the Foundation Stone upon which the world was established, which is hidden under the foundations of the Temple, is inscribed with the Ineffable Name. This Name is the most closely guarded secret of Judaism, an extremely powerful means by which someone can work miracles and harness the forces of nature. The Rabbis worried that the Ineffable Name might be stolen and become a devastating force in the wrong hands. Therefore, they devised a way to erase the memory of anyone seeking to memorize this secret of divine holiness, and to spirit it away to some location outside the holy precincts.

Jesus, upon being banished from Jewish society, decided to avenge himself. He entered the holy precincts, inscribed the Ineffable Name on parchment, made an incision in his thigh, stuck the parchment into the cut, closed the wound, and left, with no one the wiser. This way, even though he forgot the name that he had tried to memorize, upon returning home he removed the parchment from his flesh and thereby deceived the Sages of Israel. Now, with the Ineffable Name in hand, he could use it to work the miracles that would be described in the New Testament, the ones that won him the admiration of the masses and inspired their belief that he was the messiah and Son of God.

Eli Yassif, Toledot Yeshu (The Life Story of Jesus).​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

In one of the most remarkable Jewish polemics against Jesus of Nazareth, Toledot Yeshu, the narrative forgoes the former accusations made by Judaism against Jesus, i.e., that he's a sorcerer using black magic to perform the miracles that seduce his followers, and instead births a new narrative that in effect claims, first, that Jesus did, after all, have supernatural powers, and second, that those powers actually come out of Jewish religion and not from the dark arts.

Toledot Yeshu . . . relates that the Foundation Stone upon which the world was established, which is hidden under the foundations of the Temple, is inscribed with the Ineffable Name. This Name is the most closely guarded secret of Judaism, an extremely powerful means by which someone can work miracles and harness the forces of nature. The Rabbis worried that the Ineffable Name might be stolen and become a devastating force in the wrong hands. Therefore, they devised a way to erase the memory of anyone seeking to memorize this secret of divine holiness, and to spirit it away to some location outside the holy precincts.

Jesus, upon being banished from Jewish society, decided to avenge himself. He entered the holy precincts, inscribed the Ineffable Name on parchment, made an incision in his thigh, stuck the parchment into the cut, closed the wound, and left, with no one the wiser. This way, even though he forgot the name that he had tried to memorize, upon returning home he removed the parchment from his flesh and thereby deceived the Sages of Israel. Now, with the Ineffable Name in hand, he could use it to work the miracles that would be described in the New Testament, the ones that won him the admiration of the masses and inspired their belief that he was the messiah and Son of God.

Eli Yassif, Toledot Yeshu (The Life Story of Jesus).​

In context with the arguments of this thread, the idea that Jesus made an incision in his "thigh" where he placed the ineffable Name (Hashem), sealing it up, so that through it's removal he could become, or proclaim himself, messiah, should set off theological and mythological bells and whistles a plenty.

Patriarchal Semites . . . swore binding oaths by placing a hand on each other’s private parts, a habit still common among the Arabs. Words like testament, testify, and testimony still attest to the oaths sworn on the testicles. . . Abraham’s servant swore by placing his hand "under the thigh" of his master (Genesis 24, 9) because "thigh" was a common euphemism for "penis," used in superstitious fear of mentioning the divine organ directly. Myths [often] . . . made the offspring come forth from the father’s "thigh."

Barbra Walker, Encyclopedia of Myths and Legends, p. 794.​

Barbra Walker, among others, notes that in the Bible, the "thigh" is a euphemism for the phallus. The Bible is famous for not wanting to speak too nakedly concerning the source of the most seminal secrets hidden inside it. Professor Elizabeth Wyner Mark is even more on the mark:

. . . the Talmud offers a double rationale for the location of circumcision on the penis and nowhere else: one the penis is the part of the (male) body that distinguishes male from female and, two it is the fruitful part of the male body. I contend that the intermittent foregrounding of this symbol of maleness/fruitfulness reinforces a major dynamic of the patriarchal narrative -- namely, the increasing importance of the institutionalized system of patrilineal dissent, a system that ultimately overwhelms vestiges of matrilocality and matrilineal dissent. At strategic points in the story, the phallic trope reiterates its “subliminally insistent” iconic flashes until, finally, the descendants of Jacob are imagined as emerging not from the wombs of mothers but from the penis of the patriarch. They are yotsei yerekh Yaakov, “those who went out of Jacob’s `thigh’ (yerekh)” (Gen. 46:26; Exod. 1:5).

Professor Elizabeth Wyner Mark, Mark/Wounds, Vows, Emanations, in, The Covenant of Circumcision, p. 4.​

And finally, we read:

The mortal princess Semele then had a dream, in which Zeus destroyed a fruit tree with a bolt of lightning, but did not harm the fruit. He sent a bird to bring him one of the fruits, and sewed it into his thigh, so that he would be both mother and father to the new Dionysus. She saw the bull-shaped figure of a man emerge from his thigh, and then came to the realization that she herself had been the tree. Her father Cadmus, fearful of the prophetic dream, instructed Semele to make sacrifices to Zeus. Zeus came to Semele in her bed, adorned with various symbols of Dionysus. He transformed into a snake, and "Zeus made long wooing, and shouted "Euoi!" as if the winepress were near, as he begat his son who would love the cry." Immediately, Semele's bed and chambers were overgrown with vines and flowers, and the earth laughed. Zeus then spoke to Semele, revealing his true identity, and telling her to be happy: "you bring forth a son who shall not die, and you I will call immortal. Happy woman! you have conceived a son who will make mortals forget their troubles, you shall bring forth joy for gods and men." (Dionysiaca 7).

Wikipedia, Dionysus.

In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, to a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you." Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.

Luke 1:26-33.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

In context with the arguments of this thread, the idea that Jesus made an incision in his "thigh" where he placed the ineffable Name (Hashem), sealing it up, so that through it's removal he could become, or proclaim himself, messiah, should set off theological and mythological bells and whistles a plenty.

Patriarchal Semites . . . swore binding oaths by placing a hand on each other’s private parts, a habit still common among the Arabs. Words like testament, testify, and testimony still attest to the oaths sworn on the testicles. . . Abraham’s servant swore by placing his hand "under the thigh" of his master (Genesis 24, 9) because "thigh" was a common euphemism for "penis," used in superstitious fear of mentioning the divine organ directly. Myths [often] . . . made the offspring come forth from the father’s "thigh."

Barbra Walker, Encyclopedia of Myths and Legends, p. 794.​

Barbra Walker, among others, notes that in the Bible, the "thigh" is a euphemism for the phallus. The Bible is famous for not wanting to speak too nakedly concerning the source of the most seminal secrets hidden inside it. Professor Elizabeth Wyner Mark is even more on the mark:

. . . the Talmud offers a double rationale for the location of circumcision on the penis and nowhere else: one the penis is the part of the (male) body that distinguishes male from female and, two it is the fruitful part of the male body. I contend that the intermittent foregrounding of this symbol of maleness/fruitfulness reinforces a major dynamic of the patriarchal narrative -- namely, the increasing importance of the institutionalized system of patrilineal dissent, a system that ultimately overwhelms vestiges of matrilocality and matrilineal dissent. At strategic points in the story, the phallic trope reiterates its “subliminally insistent” iconic flashes until, finally, the descendants of Jacob are imagined as emerging not from the wombs of mothers but from the penis of the patriarch. They are yotsei yerekh Yaakov, “those who went out of Jacob’s `thigh’ (yerekh)” (Gen. 46:26; Exod. 1:5).

Professor Elizabeth Wyner Mark, Mark/Wounds, Vows, Emanations, in, The Covenant of Circumcision, p. 4.​

And finally, we read:

The mortal princess Semele then had a dream, in which Zeus destroyed a fruit tree with a bolt of lightning, but did not harm the fruit. He sent a bird to bring him one of the fruits, and sewed it into his thigh, so that he would be both mother and father to the new Dionysus. She saw the bull-shaped figure of a man emerge from his thigh, and then came to the realization that she herself had been the tree. Her father Cadmus, fearful of the prophetic dream, instructed Semele to make sacrifices to Zeus. Zeus came to Semele in her bed, adorned with various symbols of Dionysus. He transformed into a snake, and "Zeus made long wooing, and shouted "Euoi!" as if the winepress were near, as he begat his son who would love the cry." Immediately, Semele's bed and chambers were overgrown with vines and flowers, and the earth laughed. Zeus then spoke to Semele, revealing his true identity, and telling her to be happy: "you bring forth a son who shall not die, and you I will call immortal. Happy woman! you have conceived a son who will make mortals forget their troubles, you shall bring forth joy for gods and men." (Dionysiaca 7).

Wikipedia, Dionysus.

In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, to a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you." Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.

Luke 1:26-33.​

Concerning the myth of the conception and birth of Dionysus we read further:

During her pregnancy, Semele rejoiced in the knowledge that her son would be divine. She dressed herself in garlands of flowers and wreathes of ivy, and would run barefoot to the meadows and forests to frolic whenever she heard music. Hera became envious, and feared that Zeus would replace her with Semele as queen of Olympus. She went to Semele in the guise of an old woman who had been Cadmus' wet nurse. She made Semele jealous of the attention Zeus gave to Hera, compared with their own brief liaison, and provoked her to request Zeus to appear before her in his full godhood. Semele prayed to Zeus that he show himself. Zeus answered her prayers, but warned her than no other mortals had ever seen him as he held his lightning bolts. Semele reached out to touch them, and was burnt to ash. (Dionysiaca 8). But the infant Dionysus survived, and Zeus rescued him from the flames, sewing him into his thigh. "So the rounded thigh in labour became female, and the boy too soon born was brought forth, but not in a mother's way, having passed from a mother's womb to a father's." (Dionysiaca 9)

Wikipedia, Dionysus.​

In Genesis chapter 2:21, ha-adam seeks to have a son through one of the mortal creatures created in the same chapter. When he can't find any creature he's compatible with we're told that God puts him under anesthesia and performs a strange surgery that will allow him to have the son he seeks. In the Hebrew we're told that God cuts open his thigh (not "rib") and sews it back up again. Unlike the story of Dionysus, where the infant is placed into the thigh, and sealed unto birth from "the rounded thigh," in Genesis chapter two we're told that something is taken out of the thigh, and that what's taken out of the thigh is manufactured into a clone of ha-adam: Eve.

In Genesis chapter two, Eve is cloned from DNA taken from ha-adam. Without going into all the exegesis that shows that Eve is a clone of ha-adam, so that we have two potential mothers, but no father, we know at this point that no birth is likely to occur from two female clones. And yet if we use the story of Zeus and Dionysus as context for Genesis chapter 2, we can posit the likelihood that a "testimony" is indeed placed into ha-adam's opened "thigh" at the same time the material to clone Eve is taken out. That little tidbit is hidden in the Torah-text though it's revealed in pagan myth.

Nevertheless, right here we see the disjuncture and disunity between the pagan account and the Torah-text. In the pagan myth of Dionysus, the son born when his testimony is sewn into the thigh of Zeus is Dionysus, who's a type of Jesus of Nazareth, while when the testimony sewn into ha-adam's thigh is placed into Eve to conceive the firstborn of Adam, the result isn't he who "shall bring forth joy for gods and men," but is in fact the ******* Cain.

Where the pagan myth of Dionysus is related to the Torah-text, we see that pagan myth accepts the firstborn of these narratives as the messianic-firstborn of the gods, or God, whereas in the Torah-text, notwithstanding the fact that Eve, like Semele, believes her firstborn will be the messiah who will crush the head of the serpent, instead, he, Cain, turns out to be the son of the serpent (Eve even claims, ala Semele, to have conceived Cain through direct contact with God ---Gen. 4:1). Which leaves the seminal question of questions to be answered: If Cain and Dionysus are blood-brothers, both being the alleged firstborn of the gods, or God, and if both Cain and Dionysus are in fact sired through demonic lineage, then who is, and how is, the true firstborn of the gods, or God, conceived? And importantly, can his existence and birth be properly exegeted out of both texts, or even one of them, in a manner that's consistent with the subterfuge, but which a thoughtful reader might see as hidden a mere thumbnail's scratch, or sketch, beneath the surface of all of this?




John

 

[dybmh]

because "thigh" was a common euphemism for "penis,"

in Genesis chapter two we're told that something is taken out of the thigh.

so that we have two potential mothers, but no father,

I'm confused. If the thigh is a euphemism for penis, and in Genesis we're told something is taken from Adam's thigh/(penis), then wouldn't it be correct to conclude that Adam is male? Thus there would be a father?

 

[paarsurrey]

In a sentence, this thread is about the relationship between Zeus and the first human in the Bible, Adam; and more specifically about Adam's, and Zeus', firstborn sons.

For those willing to read more than a sentence, we can say that until the original sin, Adam appears not to have been strictly mortal himself. It's only after the sin that God kills a mortal creature and gives its flesh to cover up Adam's nakedness after his, Adam's, spiritual covering is removed because of the sin. There's a sense in which the story of Zeus' firstborn son, and the story of Adam's firstborn son, are not just parallel, but where you can't fully understand the nature of Adam's firstborn son, until you're willing to do the hard work of exegeting pagan and Jewish mythology as though they're discussing the same thing.

John

" original sin "

Did (Jesus) Yeshua talk about the "original sin ", please?
If yes, then kindly quote from him for the claim in this issue and the gist of reason given by him in this connection, please. Right?

Regards

 

[John D. Brey]

I'm confused. If the thigh is a euphemism for penis, and in Genesis we're told something is taken from Adam's thigh/(penis), then wouldn't it be correct to conclude that Adam is male? Thus there would be a father?

In a sense, it could appear that ha-adam birth's Eve from his "thigh." But at best this would seem to be parthenogenesis, implying that ha-adam is a female; like a lizard that produces daughters without a male, but never a male, without a male.

In the natural sciences, living organisms began as females. And as I argued in another thread, the male body, the male organ, is a farce, a fake, a biological lie, since it's merely an evolutionary addendum to the female body and not a true binary opposite. Males like you and me are in truth merely phallic-females so far as our biology is concerned. In a scientific sense our male-ness is parasitical in relationship to the female form. The phallus, scientifically speaking, is a parasitical worm and not a true opposition to the vulva/vagina; its a vulva/vagina sutured shut (Genesis 2:21) to create not a true opposition to the female, but merely a phallicy and a facade (fake fore skene) of biblical proportions.

If there's a true biological male, it would be the most ironic, and the ultimate speciation-event in history since it would require an original, singular, male, to come almost out of nowhere, as a true, genuine, binary opposition to females and we phallic-females (you and I).

It's simply unbelievable that the Masoretic Text and Jewish tradition have bamboozled the Western world into the idea that male flesh is original, and female is anomalous, when everything in science and truth teaches quite the opposite. It's beyond the ken of our normal thinking even to imagine the scientific revolution that's coming when this one scientific falsehood is reversed so that its correction filters throughout the sciences, theology, and philosophy (not in that order) of the new world order.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

" original sin "

Did (Jesus) Yeshua talk about the "original sin ", please?
If yes, then kindly quote from him for the claim in this issue and the gist of reason given by him in this connection, please. Right?

Regards

What if I don't, and I don't, own a red-letter edition of the Gospels? Then, from what I gather, I can't convince you I'm quoting Jesus. Dylan said it's all in the song. You've implied its all in the red ink. I have no red ink edition and thus find myself in the outer regions and the limbo of the lost both of which result in fear and trembling and gnashing of teeth.



John