DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Things of the Spirit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 5984--------------------------------------------------
Back again to the tree.
By: Runner Date: September 12, 2013, 2:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
At least once a year I find myself back here again. Dwelling
upon the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Heaven knows why I do this, as we can never get any solid
answers. I just 'kick it around' in my mind...come to some kind
of resolve, then pack it away again for another time.
Knowing that the tree in the garden was metaphoric and Satan in
the tree metaphorical, I am back to dwelling on the thought and
almost convinced that the mind is the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil. Was then, is now.
They had a choice of using the spiritual mind...and probably did
for a very long time.
Then Eve " had a thought" a suggestion that did not originate
from God's Spirit.
She entertained the thought, and accepted( ate) the thought. And
gave to her husband also.
" Hath God said.." " You can be a gods" "You can have your own
thoughts.." " You can be a free being.." Independent.
I think the way back is when our minds are totally under the
control of the Spirit.
( ".. transformed by the renewing of the mind.." )
The mind and the tree, one and the same thing.
#Post#: 5985--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Kerry Date: September 12, 2013, 3:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Moses said man is a tree of the field. So the tree may
represent more than the mind.
You will be as gods? As in Psalm 82?
Psalm 82:5 They know not, neither will they understand; they
walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of
course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the
most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all
nations.
I also think there were 70 trees in Eden. The Gentiles were
thus shown to be saved in the future. Adam and Eve were to have
children to bring them salvation.
I think the error was Eve trying to go it alone. She and Adam
were supposed to become one. Instead she turned her attention
to the false consciousness of the serpent and listened to him.
For me, the two trees are meant to be one. They were to be one
and they were meant to eat of the Tree of Life and the Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil at the same time. The male cannot
achieve spiritual perfection on his own, and neither can the
female. They must become as the angels in Heaven, neither male
nor female but both. So the fabric of the intended union
between the two trees was broken.
I say this because they were told they could eat of "every
tree." They were also told not to eat of one tree. What does
that mean? How could it both be possible? Consider salt. If
you were to ingest either chlorine or sodium by itself, it would
kill you. But together, they are life-preserving salt. To me,
salt is a holy symbol since it shows how two poisons can be made
into something of value. But if the salt has lost its savor,
what is it good for? By my way of thinking, Adam and Eve lost
their savor by not becoming one.
The serpent is the false consciousness of the fallen Gentiles to
me. For Adam and Eve to do their jobs as the elect working to
bring salvation to all, sooner or later they had to deal with
the serpent. Eden would be pointless to me without that
serpent. It is the fallen gods -- and gods there were too if
you want to call fallen spiritual beings gods. Evil in high
places. Sadly, Adam and Eve became like the fallen gods to a
certain extent. Not completely, but in part. I believe they
were meant to be like benevolent gods -- "taking up serpents."
The claim is, I think, Jesus did this and enabled his followers
to do it.
Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my
name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly
thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick,
and they shall recover.
In terms of Genesis, they could eat of the Tree of Knowledge
without harm. And they would not speak with the forked tongue
of the serpent. They could cast out the fallen gods -- just as
Moses' rod/serpent ate up the rods/serpents of the black
magicians. It didn't harm Moses if his serpent ate theirs.
#Post#: 5987--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: George Date: September 12, 2013, 9:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5985#msg5985
date=1379017596]
I think the error was Eve trying to go it alone. She and Adam
were supposed to become one. Instead she turned her attention
to the false consciousness of the serpent and listened to him.
For me, the two trees are meant to be one. They were to be one
and they were meant to eat of the Tree of Life and the Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil at the same time. The male cannot
achieve spiritual perfection on his own, and neither can the
female. They must become as the angels in Heaven, neither male
nor female but both. So the fabric of the intended union
between the two trees was broken.
[/quote]
I do not understand what you are saying here, it seems as if you
took what Jesus said out of context. The Pharisees had come to
Jesus with a puzzle, trying to catch him off guard. They posed
the question about the resurrection, they referred to the Jewish
law that said if a man died without child then his brother was
to take her in marriage and conceive a son in his name. They
asked if this happen six times over, so that the women was
married to six brothers, who would have her on the other side.
Jesus replies "Neither will they marry anymore, they will be
like the angels" How does this tie into what you have put forth
in your post?
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5985#msg5985
date=1379017596]
The serpent is the false consciousness of the fallen Gentiles to
me. For Adam and Eve to do their jobs as the elect working to
bring salvation to all, sooner or later they had to deal with
the serpent. Eden would be pointless to me without that
serpent. It is the fallen gods -- and gods there were too if
you want to call fallen spiritual beings gods. Evil in high
places. Sadly, Adam and Eve became like the fallen gods to a
certain extent. Not completely, but in part. I believe they
were meant to be like benevolent gods -- "taking up serpents."
The claim is, I think, Jesus did this and enabled his followers
to do it.
Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my
name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly
thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick,
and they shall recover.
[/quote]
I would argue that Mark 16:17 is an interpolation. This verse
from my understanding is not found in the earliest manuscripts.
Therefor I would not read into it anything. Have I been mislead
as to the authenticity of this verse?
Off topic a bit: but it is one heck of a coincidence, I just got
home from a friends house who was showing me a new show on
National Geographic channel about the church's that practice
taking up poisonous snakes, fire dancing, and speaking in
tongues. My reply was that it was ridiculous and based on a man
made scripture. I quoted Mark 16:17 and said this is the only
reference to handling serpents and drinking deadly poison yet it
is a man written scripture. I told him that these church's base
all there practices and beliefs on this single verse.
#Post#: 5988--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Kerry Date: September 13, 2013, 7:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=George M. C. Jr. link=topic=606.msg5987#msg5987
date=1379040608]
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5985#msg5985
date=1379017596]
I think the error was Eve trying to go it alone. She and Adam
were supposed to become one. Instead she turned her attention
to the false consciousness of the serpent and listened to him.
For me, the two trees are meant to be one. They were to be one
and they were meant to eat of the Tree of Life and the Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil at the same time. The male cannot
achieve spiritual perfection on his own, and neither can the
female. They must become as the angels in Heaven, neither male
nor female but both. So the fabric of the intended union
between the two trees was broken.
[/quote]
I do not understand what you are saying here, it seems as if you
took what Jesus said out of context. The Pharisees had come to
Jesus with a puzzle, trying to catch him off guard. They posed
the question about the resurrection, they referred to the Jewish
law that said if a man died without child then his brother was
to take her in marriage and conceive a son in his name. They
asked if this happen six times over, so that the women was
married to six brothers, who would have her on the other side.
Jesus replies "Neither will they marry anymore, they will be
like the angels" How does this tie into what you have put forth
in your post?[/quote]
In other words, they would be like the original h'adam before he
was divided into male and female. The question people were
asking him didn't make sense because they thought people were
married in heaven. They are already one. They are not two
working towards being one.
[quote][quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5985#msg5985
date=1379017596]
The serpent is the false consciousness of the fallen Gentiles to
me. For Adam and Eve to do their jobs as the elect working to
bring salvation to all, sooner or later they had to deal with
the serpent. Eden would be pointless to me without that
serpent. It is the fallen gods -- and gods there were too if
you want to call fallen spiritual beings gods. Evil in high
places. Sadly, Adam and Eve became like the fallen gods to a
certain extent. Not completely, but in part. I believe they
were meant to be like benevolent gods -- "taking up serpents."
The claim is, I think, Jesus did this and enabled his followers
to do it.
Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my
name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly
thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick,
and they shall recover.
[/quote]
I would argue that Mark 16:17 is an interpolation. This verse
from my understanding is not found in the earliest manuscripts.
Therefor I would not read into it anything. Have I been mislead
as to the authenticity of this verse?[/quote]No. But if it is
a forgery, it's one of the best. It may even have been an
inspired forgery.
[quote]Off topic a bit: but it is one heck of a coincidence, I
just got home from a friends house who was showing me a new show
on National Geographic channel about the church's that practice
taking up poisonous snakes, fire dancing, and speaking in
tongues. My reply was that it was ridiculous and based on a man
made scripture. I quoted Mark 16:17 and said this is the only
reference to handling serpents and drinking deadly poison yet it
is a man written scripture. I told him that these church's base
all there practices and beliefs on this single verse.
[/quote]Yes, notice they always talk about "speaking in tongues"
while Mark has it "speaking with new tongues." I say it's a
fine thing if it is a forgery since it goes so well with other
passages like the one where Isaiah's lips are cleansed:
Isaiah 6:5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am
a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of
unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of
hosts.
6 Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in
his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:
7 And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched
thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.
And:
James 3:5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth
great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the
tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and
setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of
hell.
7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and
of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of
deadly poison.
I can see James thinking of Eden -- of how Adam was given
dominion over the animals. Then he goes on about trying to
have things two ways at once instead of choosing the good only
-- Knowledge of good and evil -- trying to go in two directions
at the same time:
10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My
brethren, these things ought not so to be.
11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and
bitter?
The tongue often deceives and tries to go in two directions. As
the Indians put it, "White man speaks with forked tongue." Or
Samuel, "Choose this day . . . how long will you hesitate
between two opinions." James even goes further about this
hesitation and says if we can see the good, we should do it.
4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not,
to him it is sin.
Failing to do the good leaves a door open to do evil. Sin is
"crouching" at the door, waiting to pounce if we fail to do the
good when we see it. God warned Cain. Sin was waiting to
pounce. But Cain went and go into an argument, fighting with
words -- unclean lips. Before he knew what happened, the beast
rose up and took over and he had killed Abel. I'd say the
serpent was waiting for Cain and God told him to see it. What
would a few angry words matter? Murder and being angry
without a good reason are the same sin. Just a matter of
degree. I'm wandering off topic. I'll stop now.
#Post#: 5989--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: George Date: September 13, 2013, 12:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5988#msg5988
date=1379074066]
In other words, they would be like the original h'adam before he
was divided into male and female. The question people were
asking him didn't make sense because they thought people were
married in heaven. They are already one. They are not two
working towards being one.
[/quote]
Right, but Jesus was referring to after the resurrection was he
not? The real question I guess is how then could a man and women
achieve this now in the present, in this physical world? I
understand this to refer to what we will become in the
afterlife, we will be like the angels, neither male or female.
#Post#: 5990--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Kerry Date: September 13, 2013, 3:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=George M. C. Jr. link=topic=606.msg5989#msg5989
date=1379092344]
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5988#msg5988
date=1379074066]
In other words, they would be like the original h'adam before he
was divided into male and female. The question people were
asking him didn't make sense because they thought people were
married in heaven. They are already one. They are not two
working towards being one.
[/quote]
Right, but Jesus was referring to after the resurrection was he
not? The real question I guess is how then could a man and women
achieve this now in the present, in this physical world? I
understand this to refer to what we will become in the
afterlife, we will be like the angels, neither male or
female.[/quote]
I don't know two people could achieve this in this world. Can
two people become "one flesh"? If a husband and wife have sex,
do they become so united they have only one body?
Some people think that means the child, but the two parents
are not becoming the child. And what if they had twins?
In the Resurrection, the two are restored back to being as
h'adam was. There is no marrying -- no choosing whom to marry
-- because that's already been done and the two are one. While
such a being can appear as either male or female, they usually
show up as male angels if visiting the earth but they can show
up as female if they like. One "half" stays in heaven while the
other "half" visits the earth. If the role on earth is active,
we see them as male. If the role is more motherly or feminine,
such angels are perceived as female.
I asked Michael if I could see his feminine manifestation and I
was allowed to see it. "He" changed into a "she" before my
eyes.
Think of it in human terms of role playing. Traditionally, men
often went out to get work while women stayed at home to cook
and clean. But is that the way it has to be? No. If the
man can't work, he can stay at home and the wife can take on
his role. The man can also cook and clean. What they do
depends on what is needed at the moment.
I had a vision once with Abraham and Sarah in it. I didn't talk
to him. He saw me, smiled and waved. Sarah told me she would
do something for me that I had prayed for someone to do. It
all seemed natural enough at the time; but when the vision
ended, I realized a "woman" couldn't do that. Yet Sarah
promised it to me. That is because she is spiritually not male
or female. She and Abraham are the same being although in my
vision they showed up as two.
Now spiritually they did become one before she died. Again
this is concealed in the Scriptures. Abraham is told become
perfect. We don't read that Sarah was told that. But how
could he become perfect unless "his other half" also became
perfect? And how could the "child of promise" be born in the
right image and likeness spiritually until they had done this?
We see this perfection achieved when their names were changed.
Abram got the "feminine" "h" added to his name, and Sarah's name
also changed. But physically in this world, they remained two
people. In the resurrection, they can appear as one being or
two -- or as many as they like.
The question about which husband would be that woman's husband
in the resurrection was off the mark. Marriage on this earth is
almost never with our spiritual counterparts. Very seldom.
It would be a terrible thing if two beings trying to achieve
perfection sinned against each other. Thus if they have
problems that need to be solved before they are ready to ascend
and cease incarnating, they marry other people to work out
those problems. When they are both ready to merge and
become one, then they meet and they have no bad past history.
Joseph was "the husband" of Mary in earthly terms; but her
"other half" never came to the earth. That also was her first
and only lifetime. She did not incur any karma -- or as they
say they never sinned. Thus when she died, she was ready to
merge with her "other half" and did. Her role on the earth was
defined as "passive" and "female." That's what was needed.
The "other half" could have done it too -- and appeared as
female. Male and female are illusions.
Yes, they are illusions, but on the earth to get things done,
jobs get divided up. Someone has to do some things while the
other does others. In spiritual terms, someone has to take the
job of being in charged, thinking, and making decisions while
remaining connected to God. Thus "the man" can be seen as
between God and the woman. But to get things done, one of them
had to take the more dangerous job of lacking a direct
connection to God and depending on the other half. The job is
dangerous since if that connection is broken, "she" can be
deceived in a way "he" cannot.
Eve was deceived, Adam was not. And it would have been
impossible for the serpent to deceive Adam that way. Yet like
it or not, the woman has the more honorable role since she is
putting herself more at risk in order to serve. If she forgets
her purpose is to serve others and to take direction from "the
man," she gets lost. If the man fails to "love her as his own
body," she also gets lost. He has sinned against himself too.
I'd say we have two spiritual problems still. We have men who
do not want to exercise spiritual authority using their minds to
express love for women -- and true authority comes from love.
Sheep trust shepherds because they know the shepherd loves them.
Men tend to run things out of vanity -- ego -- machismo.
Women can have the problem of not wanting to take the spot where
they can do the most good -- they want to take credit, or they
want to be boss.
Can a marriage work if a man is bossy and gives his wife orders
based on his wants and wishes and not on what is best for her
and their children? No, the wife won't trust such a man and
won't feel safe "obeying" him. Can a marriage work if the
woman wants to run everything according to her whims? I'd say
no because the man is going to find it hard to love her. She's
too selfish. Wants everything her way, won't listen to what
others say.
Over time, men have picked up spiritual problems from women and
now exhibit feminine spiritual problems; and the women have
picked up masculine problems. What a mess! But it's to be
expected as the human race evolves into "neither male nor
female." Still it is unfortunate to see men behaving the way
silly women do or women behaving like arrogant men. It is
better if men can pick up feminine virtues and women masculine
ones; and this also happens for some as we evolve into neither
male nor female. But it really is sad to see a woman with
feminine problems add to them by taking on masculine problems --
or the man who hasn't learned the masculine virtues adopt female
weaknesses.
Just as individuals split and then come back together, the
human race as groups do it. H'adam contained thousands of souls
just as the Body of Christ does -- I'd say they're the same
thing. Jesus was pure and perfect in both feminine and
masculine ways. When we read that "water and blood" came from
his side, he was dividing himself into male and female. The
"head" was masculine -- that part would ascend to Heaven to
exercise spiritual authority. The "water and blood" came from
his side just as Eve was taken from the side of h'adam. That
became the church below. He was obeying the commandment to be
fruitful and multiply.
#Post#: 5991--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Kerry Date: September 13, 2013, 3:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=George M. C. Jr. link=topic=606.msg5989#msg5989
date=1379092344]
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=606.msg5988#msg5988
date=1379074066]
In other words, they would be like the original h'adam before he
was divided into male and female. The question people were
asking him didn't make sense because they thought people were
married in heaven. They are already one. They are not two
working towards being one.
[/quote]
Right, but Jesus was referring to after the resurrection was he
not? The real question I guess is how then could a man and women
achieve this now in the present, in this physical world? I
understand this to refer to what we will become in the
afterlife, we will be like the angels, neither male or
female.[/quote]
I don't know two people could achieve this in this world. Can
two people become "one flesh"? If a husband and wife have sex,
do they become so united they have only one body?
Some people think that means the child, but the two parents
are not becoming the child. And what if they had twins?
In the Resurrection, the two are restored back to being as
h'adam was. There is no marrying -- no choosing whom to marry
-- because that's already been done and the two are one. While
such a being can appear as either male or female, they usually
show up as male angels if visiting the earth but they can show
up as female if they like. One "half" stays in heaven while the
other "half" visits the earth. If the role on earth is active,
we see them as male. If the role is more motherly or feminine,
such angels are perceived as female.
I asked Michael if I could see his feminine manifestation and I
was allowed to see it. "He" changed into a "she" before my
eyes.
Think of it in human terms of role playing. Traditionally, men
often went out to get work while women stayed at home to cook
and clean. But is that the way it has to be? No. If the
man can't work, he can stay at home and the wife can take on
his role. The man can also cook and clean. What they do
depends on what is needed at the moment.
I had a vision once with Abraham and Sarah in it. I didn't talk
to him. He saw me, smiled and waved. Sarah told me she would
do something for me that I had prayed for someone to do. It
all seemed natural enough at the time; but when the vision
ended, I realized a "woman" couldn't do that. Yet Sarah
promised it to me. That is because she is spiritually not male
or female. She and Abraham are the same being although in my
vision they showed up as two.
Now spiritually they did become one before she died. Again
this is concealed in the Scriptures. Abraham is told become
perfect. We don't read that Sarah was told that. But how
could he become perfect unless "his other half" also became
perfect? And how could the "child of promise" be born in the
right image and likeness spiritually until they had done this?
We see this perfection achieved when their names were changed.
Abram got the "feminine" "h" added to his name, and Sarah's name
also changed. But physically in this world, they remained two
people. In the resurrection, they can appear as one being or
two -- or as many as they like.
The question about which husband would be that woman's husband
in the resurrection was off the mark. Marriage on this earth is
almost never with our spiritual counterparts. Very seldom.
It would be a terrible thing if two beings trying to achieve
perfection sinned against each other. Thus if they have
problems that need to be solved before they are ready to ascend
and cease incarnating, they marry other people to work out
those problems. When they are both ready to merge and
become one, then they meet and they have no bad past history.
Joseph was "the husband" of Mary in earthly terms; but her
"other half" never came to the earth. That also was her first
and only lifetime. She did not incur any karma -- or as they
say they never sinned. Thus when she died, she was ready to
merge with her "other half" and did. Her role on the earth was
defined as "passive" and "female." That's what was needed.
The "other half" could have done it too -- and appeared as
female. Male and female are illusions.
Yes, they are illusions, but on the earth to get things done,
jobs get divided up. Someone has to do some things while the
other does others. In spiritual terms, someone has to take the
job of being in charged, thinking, and making decisions while
remaining connected to God. Thus "the man" can be seen as
between God and the woman. But to get things done, one of them
had to take the more dangerous job of lacking a direct
connection to God and depending on the other half. The job is
dangerous since if that connection is broken, "she" can be
deceived in a way "he" cannot.
Eve was deceived, Adam was not. And it would have been
impossible for the serpent to deceive Adam that way. Yet like
it or not, the woman has the more honorable role since she is
putting herself more at risk in order to serve. If she forgets
her purpose is to serve others and to take direction from "the
man," she gets lost. If the man fails to "love her as his own
body," she also gets lost. He has sinned against himself too.
I'd say we have two spiritual problems still. We have men who
do not want to exercise spiritual authority using their minds to
express love for women -- and true authority comes from love.
Sheep trust shepherds because they know the shepherd loves them.
Men tend to run things out of vanity -- ego -- machismo.
Women can have the problem of not wanting to take the spot where
they can do the most good -- they want to take credit, or they
want to be boss.
Can a marriage work if a man is bossy and gives his wife orders
based on his wants and wishes and not on what is best for her
and their children? No, the wife won't trust such a man and
won't feel safe "obeying" him. Can a marriage work if the
woman wants to run everything according to her whims? I'd say
no because the man is going to find it hard to love her. She's
too selfish. Wants everything her way, won't listen to what
others say.
Over time, men have picked up spiritual problems from women and
now exhibit feminine spiritual problems; and the women have
picked up masculine problems. What a mess! But it's to be
expected as the human race evolves into "neither male nor
female." Still it is unfortunate to see men behaving the way
silly women do or women behaving like arrogant men. It is
better if men can pick up feminine virtues and women masculine
ones; and this also happens for some as we evolve into neither
male nor female. But it really is sad to see a woman with
feminine problems add to them by taking on masculine problems --
or the man who hasn't learned the masculine virtues adopt female
weaknesses.
Just as individuals split and then come back together, the
human race as groups do it. H'adam contained thousands of souls
just as the Body of Christ does -- I'd say they're the same
thing. Jesus was pure and perfect in both feminine and
masculine ways. When we read that "water and blood" came from
his side, he was dividing himself into male and female. The
"head" was masculine -- that part would ascend to Heaven to
exercise spiritual authority. The "water and blood" came from
his side just as Eve was taken from the side of h'adam. That
became the church below. He was obeying the commandment to be
fruitful and multiply.
Don't forget Jesus compared himself to Moses' serpent on the
pole. The serpent and the tree are in both Genesis and the
Gospels. "Immortality" depends on that serpent energy -- the
incorrect form if introduced into the flesh produces death.
Ever notice how people like to look at traffic accidents and
gory things? There is a hidden part in people fascinated by
death. They like violent movies. We also hear on the news
horrible stories like the woman in China cooking her husband.
This is when the death-serpent nature has taken over someone so
fully, he or she is not control. Or the man (in Florida?) on
drugs who was eating the other man's face? This is
fascination with death -- killing and eating flesh -- etc.
It's the reason drinking blood is dangerous since the life force
in blood is to a degree that death-serpent energy and rouse more
of it in a person who voluntarily enjoys it. The same
death-serpent energy that prompts us to kill other things and
eat them or commit violent acts also eventually kills our
physical bodies. Thus by "eating" the forbidden fruit, Adam
and Eve were taking into themselves the death-serpent nature,
condemning their bodies to death. The proper serpent energy
which gives life was no longer with them.
#Post#: 5999--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Runner Date: September 15, 2013, 10:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
;D This seems to be a thread that takes many twists and turns.
LOL
I don't quite know where to grab it or what to take as a
discussion point. Much interesting stuff here.
I guess I'll just ask one question and then just watch and see
how the rest discussionS unroll.
Kerry I remember before you have mentioned 70 trees. As trees
stand for the life of man, are you saying that " Adam and Eve"
were seventy people in "the garden" ?
What do you see as The garden? ( well, that is two questions
not one.)
Keep on with the rest of the subjects guys...a lot to take in,
but interesting. :)
#Post#: 6002--------------------------------------------------
Re: Back again to the tree.
By: Kerry Date: September 15, 2013, 1:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Adam and Eve contained the souls of the future Israel. They
were one tree. Adam is a tree. The other trees represent the
seventy nations. Thus the souls of the Gentiles were also to
be brought into Eden.
The Sanhedrin had 70 members too since each member represented
one nation.
When Israel crossed the sea, they found 70 trees. This showed
their purpose as a nation of priests. At that time the
original number had grown from 144,000 to at least 600,000.
The world got divided up and reassigned to this new group. The
boundaries of the Gentile nations had something to do with this.
Deuteronomy 32:8 When the Most High divided to the nations
their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set
the bounds of the people according to the number of the children
of Israel.
Today it would be like sending missionaries out, telling each
one what city or country to go to. It started in Eden, I'd
say. You can think of it two ways. Paul talks about being
grafted into the tree -- meaning the Tree of Life. You can also
take graft good stock into the seventy nations.
Noah did this to replenish the earth, planting the "vine."
Jeremiah also did this I think. Uproot and plant -- set over
the nations.
I think there is an adjustment at every "census." Things get
reapportioned and fine-tuned. The account of the Census
before Jesus was born is important spiritually. (All scripture
is good for doctrine. It's more than mere history.)
Paul talks about how some things concealed for ages were being
made clear when he talks about Jews and Gentiles. I believe
the 70 trees shows the purpose of Eden. All Gentiles were to
be saved. Thus Genesis and Revelation agree. Every nation,
tribe, etc.
*****************************************************