Was Eve justified in eating of the tree of knowledge?

[Mr Cheese]

That picture of Christ you are using was painted by a Hindu monk. It was inspired by a vision he had of christ. It is in many of the Hindu temples of the Ramakrishna order of swamis.

cool thanks for the info....

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

Gnostics tended not to take their books seriously either...

as I said in another thread (I forget so this is slightly different)a good Gnostic perspective on scripture is this:

Scripture teaches us that coffee is hot.
We know coffee is hot because we can touch it, and we are told it is hot.
Scripture does not teach us what coffee tastes like.
...

I am interested. You see reading this immediately prompts a question in my head.
"If you dont take a book seriously, how then can it teach you something?"

If the scripture tells you coffee is hot and you dont take it seriously ... how then do you know it is hot (partially) because it says so?

I am confused

 

[Mr Cheese]

I am interested. You see reading this immediately prompts a question in my head.
"If you dont take a book seriously, how then can it teach you something?"

If the scripture tells you coffee is hot and you dont take it seriously ... how then do you know it is hot (partially) because it says so?

I am confused

a begets b, which begets C

In our example....

coffee is hot, we are told this
We read about the hotness of coffee

We learn more about this when we pick up the coffee cup.

It is here scripture stops.

It is here where Gnosis begins.
It is here where we drink the coffee.
Scripture tells us nothing about the taste of Coffee, just that it is hot.
...

Thus it is the same with holy scripture. It tells us what tradition knows God to be like. It tells us that God has a beard, five arms and is name George.
Then we pray and meditate and have interaction with God
Scripture has ended. Gnosis has begun. It is here where we hear God's voice, we see his third nipple.

Scripture thus acts like a sign post. But it is the "reader" that must actually walk along the road that the sign post is pointing to. The sign post, no matter how much we insist, is not the road.

This is how "mysticism" differs from religion.

Hope that helps

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

a begets b, which begets C

In our example....

coffee is hot, we are told this
We read about the hotness of coffee

We learn more about this when we pick up the coffee cup.

It is here scripture stops.

It is here where Gnosis begins.
It is here where we drink the coffee.
Scripture tells us nothing about the taste of Coffee, just that it is hot.
...

Thus it is the same with holy scripture. It tells us what tradition knows God to be like. It tells us that God has a beard, five arms and is name George.
Then we pray and meditate and have interaction with God
Scripture has ended. Gnosis has begun. It is here where we hear God's voice, we see his third nipple.

Ok ..
what confuses me is the following.
Scripture tells you coffee is hot.
You take a cup and you see it IS hot.
Scripture doesnt tell you anything else about the coffee. You investigate for yourself. Fair.

Now lets take the sripture again.
Scripture tells you God has a beard or that the earth was created in 6 days.
You cant see that God has a beard or you would come to the conclusion that it was not created in 6 days.
What to do?

Let me try to ask it more provocatively: "How do you know something is "holy" scripture and not rubbish?"

 

[Greatest I am]

Well Gnostics did just that....

they wrote their own....

would I give you a label? maybe....


Gnostics tended not to take their books seriously either...

as I said in another thread (I forget so this is slightly different)a good Gnostic perspective on scripture is this:

Scripture teaches us that coffee is hot.
We know coffee is hot because we can touch it, and we are told it is hot.
Scripture does not teach us what coffee tastes like.

Mar Mani, founder of the Manichaean faith (arguably the first organised religion, which lasted a 1000 years) has had much written about him. A quick internet search will reveal much about him and his faith. You will find allusions to dualism, evil and zoroastrianism.
However if one actually looks closer, Mani actually refused to discuss the nature of the universe and life. To him. as a Gnostic, such things were not even really worth bothering to worry about or more rightly to conceive of. These things were ineffible....

Ineffible is a wholey Gnostic embraced idea...
...................

As a Gnostic Christian with Gnosis, I disagree.

God and reality can be described.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I am interested. You see reading this immediately prompts a question in my head.
"If you dont take a book seriously, how then can it teach you something?"

If the scripture tells you coffee is hot and you dont take it seriously ... how then do you know it is hot (partially) because it says so?

I am confused

How seriously do you need to read a fairy tale to get the moral lesson?

Note how nicely children learn without belief in the characters.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Ok ..
what confuses me is the following.
Scripture tells you coffee is hot.
You take a cup and you see it IS hot.
Scripture doesnt tell you anything else about the coffee. You investigate for yourself. Fair.

Now lets take the sripture again.
Scripture tells you God has a beard or that the earth was created in 6 days.
You cant see that God has a beard or you would come to the conclusion that it was not created in 6 days.
What to do?

Let me try to ask it more provocatively: "How do you know something is "holy" scripture and not rubbish?"

We know it is not holy because nothing is holy that has not been named so by men.
If God wanted something holy on earth then that example would be crystal clear.

Regards
DL

 

[Mr Cheese]

You cant see that God has a beard or you would come to the conclusion that it was not created in 6 days.
What to do?

Let me try to ask it more provocatively: "How do you know something is "holy" scripture and not rubbish?"

What to do?

Well Gnostics understand that cosmology is mainly just a way of understanding things...an approximation.

For example God having a beard is actually a part of Judaism. In kabbalah we find the idea that God has a beard. There are texts describing God's beard hair....I kid you not!

But why a beard? The beard is SYMBOLIC. It is a symbol of wisdom, of many separate "parts" that together make a cohesive whole.

Thus it is in Gnosticism, God's nipple and the fact he is called George are symbols.
In order to understand the nature of George and the 6 days of creation we must ascertain what they mean. Again these are sign posts.

For example it would be like thinking about running. We spend days and weeks thinking about running. While and before we actually go running. The purpose of thinking about running is to "help" us actually participate in the Olympics. Thus we are focused, focused upon the Olympics.

Gnosticism teaches that Gnosis is experiential knowledge. Thomas Aquinas actually defined mysticism as experiential knowledge of God. Now Gnosis goes further, it states in order to know something we must become it. Thus in order to know the Olympics we must become it. In order to know God we must become it. This is where Gnosticism differs from "Christianity" or more "accurately" .."churchianity"

So the six days, whether God is called George or Susan is like thinking about running. In themselves they are only important as aides, helpful things. They are of God, but Gnosticism posits the idea that once we have begun or have learned to actually know God fully, there is no 6 days or George..There is only God, which is ineffable.
As the Zen guys say:

"Those that know do not speak
Those that speak do not know"

So really for Gnostics there is no "worrying" about whether we can actually see God's beard or if there were 6 days.....as those are like paint brushes. Brushes are great, but an artist paints a picture they don't paint brushes.

.............

How do you know if something is holy or rubbish?

Does it enable Gnosis?
Does it fit in with the universal language of the divine that is expressed in many traditions, that when one begins to learn it, one can see it very easily.

For example the classic journey of the Buddha is also the classic journey of Christ:

A child is born into a privileged or special family
They leave this family
They wander in the desert of forgetfulness
They gain the magic turnip
The magic turnip is remembrance of who they are
They return home

This pattern can be seen in many many places....The Gnostics find this in the Acts of Thomas. This Apocryphal text is used by Indian Christians (in India). This text contains a hymn supposedly sung by Thomas (the apostle) in prison. The hymn of the pearl describes the above journey.

We can find this journey in
Alchemy (the search for the philosopher’s stone)
Sufism, and related to this in the story of Aladdin
Star wars, the story of Anakin Sky walker
Etc.

It is these universal symbols that help us know the difference between
"Spot and the magic ball" and something that is "holy."

.................................
“The law of our life can be summed up in the axiom ‘be what you are.’ As sons and images of God, we must have no higher or more urgent obligation than to resemble Him in the purity, the universality and the perfection of our freedom in divine love.”

–Thomas Merton

 

[Mr Cheese]

As a Gnostic Christian with Gnosis, I disagree.

God and reality can be described.

Regards
DL

but not fully

 

[Mr Cheese]

We know it is not holy because nothing is holy that has not been named so by men.
If God wanted something holy on earth then that example would be crystal clear.

Regards
DL

this is problematic

This is like saying a tree is a tree because we call it a tree
If we call a tree a wombat it is actually a small hairy mammal, not a tree.



Crystal clear? to whom?

teach a Dog how to write an Opera.
You cant. Why? it is utside tis focus and conceptualisation process.

The dog can however experience an Opera.

Mankind cannot write about God, as God is like a dog writing an Opera.
But mankind can know God, as like a dog listening to an Opera, it can experience God.

Of course the dog may make attempts at an opera, barkign and howling and noises
Men may make attempts at conceptualising and conceivign of God
But like the dog, bark and whining an opera is not really the same as God

Orthodox theologian Leloup sums it up well:

If I were to say ‘I know God’, I would be a liar. God is beyond comprehension. Better to be silent and live in humility. If I were to say, ‘I do not know God’, I would also be a liar.

— Jean-Yves Leloup, Being Still: Reflections on an Ancient Mystical Tradition

​

 

[Greatest I am]

but not fully

We do not know all of phisical reality, this is true.

We do know that all that has ever been said of God has been said by man.
Can man understand the God he created. Sure can.
If you have something that you do not understand, I am here. :yes:

Regards
DL

 

[Mr Cheese]

We do not know all of phisical reality, this is true.

We do know that all that has ever been said of God has been said by man.
Can man understand the God he created. Sure can.
If you have something that you do not understand, I am here. :yes:

Regards
DL

that is not what I am saying

God that is beyond ANYTHING "said by man"
is ineffable; that is Gnosticism

The "God created by man" I dont really care about....
It is the map, not the territory

 

[Greatest I am]

"God is beyond comprehension."


Christian and Religionist dogma and B S.

Anyone who follows a God they do not understand is a fool.

Are we not in God's image? Mental image that is.

Regards
DL

 

[Mr Cheese]

"God is beyond comprehension."


Christian and Religionist dogma and B S.

Anyone who follows a God they do not understand is a fool.

Are we not in God's image? Mental image that is.

Regards
DL

Light and darkness, life and death, and right and left are siblings of one another, and inseparable. For this reason the good are not good, the bad are not bad, life is not life, and death is not death. Each will dissolve into its original nature, but what is superior to the world cannot be dissolved, for it is eternal.

The names of worldly things are utterly deceptive, for they turn the heart from what is real to what is unreal. Whoever hears the word “god“ thinks not of what is real but rather of what is unreal. So also with the words “father,” “son,” “holy spirit,” “life,” “light,” “resurrection,” “church,” and all the rest, people do not think of what is real but of what is unreal, [though] the words refer to what is real. The words [that are] heard belong to this world. [Do not be] deceived. If words belonged to the eternal realm, they would never be pronounced in this world, nor would they designate worldly things. They would refer to what is in the eternal realm.

Only one name is not pronounced in the world, the name the Father gave the Son. It is the name above all-it is the Father’s name. For the Son would not have become Father if he had not put on-the Father’s name. Those who have this name understand it but do not speak it. Those who do not have it cannot even un­derstand it.

Truth brought forth names in the world for us, and no one can refer to truth without names. Truth is one and many, for our sakes, to teach us about the one, in love, through the many.

–Gospel of Philip

 

[Greatest I am]

Light and darkness, life and death, and right and left are siblings of one another, and inseparable. For this reason the good are not good, the bad are not bad, life is not life, and death is not death. Each will dissolve into its original nature, but what is superior to the world cannot be dissolved, for it is eternal.

The names of worldly things are utterly deceptive, for they turn the heart from what is real to what is unreal. Whoever hears the word “god“ thinks not of what is real but rather of what is unreal. So also with the words “father,” “son,” “holy spirit,” “life,” “light,” “resurrection,” “church,” and all the rest, people do not think of what is real but of what is unreal, [though] the words refer to what is real. The words [that are] heard belong to this world. [Do not be] deceived. If words belonged to the eternal realm, they would never be pronounced in this world, nor would they designate worldly things. They would refer to what is in the eternal realm.

Only one name is not pronounced in the world, the name the Father gave the Son. It is the name above all-it is the Father’s name. For the Son would not have become Father if he had not put on-the Father’s name. Those who have this name understand it but do not speak it. Those who do not have it cannot even un­derstand it.

Truth brought forth names in the world for us, and no one can refer to truth without names. Truth is one and many, for our sakes, to teach us about the one, in love, through the many.

–Gospel of Philip

Crap that does not speak to the question.
Gnostics Christians are usually brighter.
You must be some other kind of Gnostic.

Regards
DL

 

[Mr Cheese]

Crap that does not speak to the question.
Gnostics Christians are usually brighter.
You must be some other kind of Gnostic.

Regards
DL

God is ineffablethe more you speak, the less you say
butall concepts by their very nature are falsewhich is a concept in itself…………Everyone is wrong including myselfWhich means everyone is right including myselfWhich means everyone is wrong, including myself………..questions lead to answers
answers lead to questions………….It is my firm beliefthat it is dangerous to hold firm beliefs……..The tao that can be spoken of is not the the taoButEven that is not the tao………….The snake swallows its tail…………………..Pass the Wendslydale Grommit………

above, below and around you,
all is spontaneously existing,
for there is nowhere which is outside Buddha Mind

–Huang Po

One day Mara, the Evil One, was travelling through the villages of India with his attendants.

He saw a man doing walking meditation whose face was lit up on wonder. The man had just discovered something on the ground in front of him.
Mara’s attendant asked what that was and Mara replied,

“A piece of truth.”

“Doesn’t this bother you when someone finds a piece of truth, O Evil One?”
his attendant asked.

“No,” Mara replied. “Right after this, they usually make a belief out of it.”


From 108 Treasures for the Heart: A Guide for Daily Living by Benny Liow

 

[Mr Cheese]

Crap that does not speak to the question.
Gnostics Christians are usually brighter.
You must be some other kind of Gnostic.

Regards
DL

what IS a Gnostic Christian in your estimation?

 

[Greatest I am]

what IS a Gnostic Christian in your estimation?

As in ancient times. Free thinkers who noted that Christianity had consolidated most of the eastern religions into Constantine's Bible. They saw the flaws and were known to think white while the Christians thought black.

We tend to understand in a logical way some of what has been written.
We recognize what is good and what is evil within the Bible.

We recognize that Constantine paid for and got a book for social control and manipulation.

Regards
DL

 

[Mr Cheese]

As in ancient times. Free thinkers who noted that Christianity had consolidated most of the eastern religions into Constantine's Bible. They saw the flaws and were known to think white while the Christians thought black.

We tend to understand in a logical way some of what has been written.
We recognize what is good and what is evil within the Bible.

We recognize that Constantine paid for and got a book for social control and manipulation.

Regards
DL

ah wait a second...its DL

I remember you from other forums



You didnt even know anything about the nag hammadi texts

 

[Greatest I am]

ah wait a second...its DL

I remember you from other forums



You didnt even know anything about the nag hammadi texts

You may be confusing me with someone else.
I have known of those through the work of Elaine Paget for 20 odd years.

Regards
DL