genisis states that A&E were not to eat the fuit of the tree, later eve says to the serpent that she/ they were commanded not to eat or "touch" the fruit [or tree?]


so which is correct? what god says first or what eve says secondly?

Ge 1:29 And God said, Behold I have given to you every seed-bearing herb sowing seed which is upon all the earth, and every tree which has in itself the fruit of seed that is sown, to you it shall be for food.
Ge 3:2 (3:3) And the woman said to the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden,
Ge 3:3 (3:4) but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said, Ye shall not eat of it, >>>>>neither shall ye touch it<<<<<<, lest ye die.


secondly: they ate and did not die? hmmm? why not?

The first account we have of the devil is found in that purely scientific book called Genesis, and is as follows: "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made, and he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. And the Lord God said Behold the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life: and eat, and live forever. Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the Garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So he drove out the man, and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword, which turned every way to keep the way of the tree of life."


According to this account the promise of the devil was fulfilled to the very letter, Adam and Eve did not die, and they did become as gods, knowing good and evil.



The account shows, however, that the gods dreaded education and knowledge then just as they do now. The church still faithfully guards the dangerous tree of knowledge, and has exerted in all ages her utmost power to keep mankind from eating the fruit thereof. The priests have never ceased repeating the old falsehood and the old threat: "Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." From every pulpit comes the same cry, born of the same fear: "Lest they eat and become as gods, knowing good and evil." For this reason, religion hates science, faith detests reason, theology is the sworn enemy of philosophy, and the church with its flaming sword still guards the hated tree, and like its supposed founder, curses to the lowest depths the brave thinkers who eat and become as gods.



If the account given in Genesis is really true, ought we not, after all, to thank this serpent? He was the first schoolmaster, the first advocate of learning, the first enemy of ignorance, the first to whisper in human ears the sacred word liberty, the creator of ambition, the author of modesty, of inquiry, of doubt, of investigation, of progress and of civilization.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/gods.html

thnx daseti

what the tale tried to say is that the human race died in it innocense state. when humans were in the constant presence of the Creator.

1. Well maybe God did tell them that if they even touch it lest they die and the author just failed to mention that.

Or perhaps Eve was just making excuses in protest of the temptation. Women are like that.

Secondly: the did finally die, rather than live forever or for thousands of years as they should have. Just think, they might still be alive today if they had continued to eat of the tree of life.

He told Adam not to eat of the tree that was in the midst of the garden. Eve wasn't made yet. God did tell Adam that he wasn't supposed to eat of it.

wisdom of greater truth that lead to the never ending fountain is easily recognized.......

indeed, there shall come a day WHEN you will have need of NO MAN, but the spirit will guide YOU in ALL THINGS......

seems perhaps we only "thought" certain things were the "devil" because these were "blanks" filled in with "mortal minds".......

did it not say that such as "the truth found them" would become as wise as SERPENTS......

perhaps we heard of a beast, and percieved it to be as images of the mind, as what is truly a beast is named many times in text, and seems it may not at all as has been "painted", by looking and hearing thru fear, creating only fearful interpretations, which are spurred by looking thru all things with a "good and bad" perspective....

this thing is good, as accessed by the mind, and this thing is bad, as accessed by the mind...

if there is no unholy in heaven, then would not all data from heaven within come as from a neutral perspective, awaiting the conversion by the heart of all data that sound as "bad" into the TRUE interpretation, that must be not as "bad", as what "bad" come from a father that speak thru all UNCONDITIONAL LOVE, and whisper into the mind all truth, waiting for the heart to complete the OTHER HALF........peace

could text be only half a truth, the other half being held as the "secret key" provided only thru the heart of any being, as inspired from beyond the mortal realm.......

did it not say "i will write my laws upon the heart of all mankind"......

the laws written are not the same laws as the text, but another half, the "untold half" that indeed could complete the "whole meaning" of any scripture......

if indeed all text is as prophecy, then who would complete the meaning other than "children" having now grown up into adults, lol......

as it was spoken "i shall make thee as "written epistles"........

the "book of life" the mind opened for each one, at the time appointed by the "father" or the original creation or greater creation of self, that walks beside each one born, not tied to the first dimension, but all about and sometimes called as a "gaurdian angel".........

as each was created in the IMAGE of their father......or just what was "created first", just as a tree is created first, then a new sapling is created that looks just like the "father or first tree"........

perhaps each indeed is a "only begotton son"....

and indeed the voice of one the speaks from the wilderness is as the voice of each father, that speak many things that thrust one on purpose into the "wilderness" for a time, to gather experience, but in the time of "wisdom" all things work together for good to those that are now "connected" to the "ambiblical cord" that tether all to it's own "original creation" as hearing now what would appear as OPPOSITE as what was once thought..........

for man shall one day find that what is up with god is as down to man, and what is down with man is as up to god.......INDEED AN OPPOSITE SIGHT OR KNOWING OF THINGS ONCE THOUGHT IT WOULD APPEAR!

if indeed god is as all knowing, then this would be as "solomons wisdom" would it not, and this would be as UNCONVENTIONAL, OPPOSITE BUT NOT OPPOSED TO TEXT IN ONE IOTA......

not as hard as it sounds......

if in all days past "night" was heard and read as a "bad" thing, then to hear it now as a "good" thing would not change any words ever spoken, but indeed flip all meanings into opposites......

indeed, greater understanding of all text is as this......

indeed, even when "jesus" came, he seemed to hear and know the "same truths" but pronounced them thru a "different perspective".......

what is UP IS DOWN........truly diobolical it would appear, that would turn evil into good and good into evil, but then if this were true, then both that "lived as evil and good" have now "consumed one another" with greater understanding, as both now see the other was created as needed for an opposite, or no "night or day" would or could have existed........

man forgets that if not seeing "murder" he would know not murder, nor the opposite of murder would be contained within the mind as all things are as "points of reference" in the time the mind is "open to all possibilities"......

as truly the "sight of god" was said to be as "ALL THINGS POSSIBLE".........AND ALL THINGS AS CREATED EQUAL.........peace

your correct in your statment RT, he did originally give adam that charge, but we have eve stating:

¶ (3:2) Now the serpent was the most crafty of all the brutes on the earth, which the Lord God made, and the serpent said to the woman, Wherefore has God said, Eat not of every tree of the garden?
2 (3:3) And the woman said to the serpent, >>We<< may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden,
3 (3:4) but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said, """Ye""" shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

so adam [if not god] had at least told eve not to eat [possibly not to touch also]

Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
she clearly understands nott to eat and the concequences if done

gad makes it more clear to adam by saying:

but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil—of it ye shall not eat, >>>>>>but in whatsoever """DAY""" ye eat of it<<<<<, ye shall {1} surely die.

yet that DAY they did not die?

This is an inversion of the more ancient Sumerian tale in which the goddess Ninhursag allows eight forbidden plants to grow in the garden of creation. Enki eats from them and is stricken. Ninhursag relents: "To the goddess Ninti I have given birth for you". Ninti means both 'female ruler of life' and 'female ruler of the rib'.

I mean this particular story is a total rip off of other more ancient myths that pre-dated it. The more research Im doing, the more obvious that is becoming. Now the rib itself becoming Eve. Not to mention Eve's name comes from the word Heva which translates to "female serpent". They weren't even trying.

I think Eve got a bum rap. She should have been able to stay in the garden if she wanted to. If she would have had a good lawyer I think the lawyer would have had the case threw out of court. I think she was just used. If you read back in Genesis it was all good. The problem was that tree shouldn't have been in the garden to begin with. I mean how could it been a good tree.

Actually their trial was correct, the problem was the people who read it didn't get it the way it was suppose to come across.

what if when we are born is "when" we are "kicked or cast" from the garden, and it is our destiny to make our way thru the maze to find our way back.........

I think Tribo that would be heresay and not be administerabled in court. I think the football was dropped too early. A breach of contract so to speak since Eve wasn't part of the original deal. I think Eve just assumed since the contract was between God and Adam that it was made to her, too.

They didn't die? Where do they live?

By the "not trying" comment actually what I meant by that was the writers of this story, Moses or whoever else might have aided him, were stealing snippets of other creation myths that pre-dated Genesis. Plagiarism in fact. They were very close. The snake was representative of Paganism and the much older belief system that was already in place and that Christianity would be in direct opposition with. The concept of a monotheistic deity such as Yahweh or Jehovah had been brought forth by the various invading tribes. The Hebrews were but one. So, in a sense, this story in the bible depicting the Tree of Knowledge (arguably one of the most critical) was a direct attempt at discrediting the much older religion of the day.

well adam is you my dear friend, so i don't know, where do you live spider......

in mythology

>>>>>>but in whatsoever """DAY""" ye eat of it<<<<<, ye shall {1} surely die.

did they ""die"" that day? - NO!

not at all dear.
As I have said the sacred author could have used any other allegory or figure among all the other traditions which were around the middle east and the semitic tribes of the area. The message to convey was one and just one.
God almighty created the world out of nothing. The human race in an act of free will decided not to obey God's command.
Again the theological principle is just one the figure could have been any other such as "God said don't drink water from that river, yet the man still did it."

so it would appear our own wisdom show us it was as an emotional death, or "seperation from god" as was called even as hell, and as the valley of the "shadow of death", as was called a place of everlasting fire, just a few clicks below the feet of each, that when born ALL are "tied by gravity" to the earth, as to have to "crawl" instead of "fly" free, as the spirit of god was called as an eagle that can "fly".......

just ideas......peace