I Would Side With the Serpent

Sometimes I wonder if 'serpents' were mistranslated from 'spirits'. I doubt all such words are a mistranslation in the bible and related texts, yet it does seem like there is something that needs correction or has been gravely misunderstood. The prospective evidence to this is more psychological, as in the way that people have acted or the result of such effects by the influence of gospel on any perspective. Even more significant is the expectations after exposure to an event, as if some have used knowledge as weapon more than a cure or for balance.

Maybe one thing misunderstood is that the knowledge said to be given by the apple (exposure) is actually only a part of a whole while it is expected to be all of the whole. With further consideration you probably see how this could be abused to control people or at least control others how they are to treat someone. It could be as simple as if someone is part of a certain religion than that someone could be diagnosed with a certain condition. Usually diagnoses have factual evidence to support such claim, yet some may feel that because of someone's religion that it is ok to diagnose that person without factual evidence of a condition.

The reasons why can get pretty deep. For one, a doctor could use the excuse that he knows a patient is a religious person therefor the doctor uses evidence based only on faith rather than something factualized. The same doctor may diagnose an atheist based on factualized evidence if the atheist relies on science. We would expect the same level of study to produce evidence, yet I doubt the possibility this same level of study or consistency in care from patient to patient actually happens as people would assume it does. I'm sure we could come up with many reasons why it is not the same.

The old ways of the serpent (as in related to the bible) seemed to be able to fairly balance a middle point between concerns as above. This doesn't seem so true anymore, and it may be time the old ways of the serpent come to an end before further corruption or carelessness occurs. There is obviously 'new ways of the serpent' and those that support the old ways surely disagree with the new ways, as the new ways support its actions by ego rather than by wisdom.

"Be as *egotistical* as your serpents".... I doubt it was suppose to happen like this.

No wonder why so many very religious people get drunk off alcohol. They probably are afraid to admit the reasons why they do.

These serpents of the new ways are nothing like those of the old ways. Who ever said serpents have teeth, venom, or anything like to even be considered evil by look alone?

Hope this helps those doctors that want to cure other doctors that mistreat patients, especially when a diagnoses is given when it is actually mere opinion and such opinion further causes mistreatment. I think here when someone says they 'would side with the serpent' they might be confused to side with mere opinion as an order.

If it was a spirit instead of a serpent, it might be seen as mere opinion since someone that follows strict science, like an atheist and some others, would find it hard to be convinced to take orders from a spirit... well, just imagine something like the Caduceus with spirits instead of serpents.

Ah... its about Halloween time. Trick or treat. =)

i completely agree

the whole "forbidden tree of knowledge" is a painfully obvious anti science metaphor, in a book written by men to control the masses stupid enough to take it literally and believe it was the word of god

what its really saying is, "dont eat from the tree of knowledge! your mind is much better off as a slave to dogmatic religious thought (or rather, the lack thereof)! the bible says so! if the bible says so, it must be true!"

s&f

[edit on 10/27/2009 by prototism]

[edit on 10/27/2009 by prototism]

Originally posted by smokingfretboard
Oh and one more thing. Your saying the knowledge of good and evil was the ability to read and write? WHERE are you getting that?? It doesn't say just "knowledge"...it says the knowledge of good and evil. Wouldn't we be taking a giant stab in the dark then, to assume it was just that...the knowledge of good and evil?

Knowledge of good and evil implies the ability to comprehend the effect of ones' actions. The preservation and transmission of this knowledge is the ability to read and write. They go together.

As smart as we think humans are compared to, say house cats, the fact that we have reading and writing, computers, internet, cars, space rockets and so on, indicates to me how handicapped we are.

Our comprehension levels are so low that only small fraction of the population understand how things work despite multiple years of schooling.
The fact that the human body requires sleep for half of its operational lifetime is unbelievably restrictive. Not to mention procuring food, clothing and shelter. This is god's way of keeping us "barefoot and pregnant" so to speak.
The fact that our memory is so short that we have to rely on written record is pitiful.
The fact that only handful of humans have been to the moon in a tin can, if you can believe that, is laughable.

But like fish who are born and die in the water who are not aware of their are restricted existence, hardly anyone on this planet gives a second thought about the condition we are in.

Oh yeah, god created humans because he loved us. Yay!








[edit on 27-10-2009 by tungus]

Originally posted by tungus

Knowledge of good and evil implies the ability to comprehend the effect of ones' actions. The preservation and transmission of this knowledge is the ability to read and write. They go together.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by tungus]

I don't see how they go together. A radio may be the means in which to bring a song or a message, but it isn't in and of itself THE song or message. The ability to write down information on quantum physics isn't the knowledge of quantum physics in and of itself. Yes, it is a form of knowledge, but it isn't specifically the knowledge of good and evil, no more than it is the knowledge of quantum physics.

Repeatedly I hear you guys talking about the "Word of God" and serpents the way the "Bible describes it". I find it ironic then, that you guys are saying God doesn't want us to know how to read and write. The 10 commandments were scribed on stone with God's own hand...and commanded by God for us to READ. The written word is one of the parts of the armor of God (the sword) that we're supposed to have. It also says "Faith comes by hearing and SEEING of the word".

dzonatas, you misinterpret Christians when you imply that we assume the right to judge others. A bad representation of a Christian would do that, (ok so that might a percentage far higher than my liking) but God is the judge of things, not us. I think a good summary of the Christians creed...if you will, is simply "God has given me more life than I ever imagined, more joy, more love and more purpose than i thought possible. If you don't have that, then I want you to experience it yourself and I want to show you how." To put it in Jesus' words "I came so that you may have life, and have it more abundantly. " It's not a "your a cancer cause you don't believe what I do". I hope you understand the difference.

God didn't create a robot (as some of you are insinuating) and with free will, we chose other things other than God. You are right in the fact that the serpent wasn't THE issue. The serpent was just the tempter/suggester of the issue. I don't even believe the issue was the fact that we have the knowledge of good and evil (if it was then even with the cross I wouldn't be able to enter heaven)....the issue was that God asked us not to taste of it, and we disobeyed and did it anyway...we SINNED. Why were those trees there in the first place? Who knows, maybe God was going to give them to us later. (With the cross we get eternal life, so the other tree has been given to us) Maybe God used the trees as a means to exercise free will...to give us the OPTION, but I feel like you guys are caught up in the tree, when you should be caught up in the sin.

Originally posted by prototist
what its really saying is, "dont eat from the tree of knowledge! your mind is much better off as a slave to dogmatic religious thought (or rather, the lack thereof)! the bible says so! if the bible says so, it must be true!"

The bible also says that we will judge angels. Whoa...that's pretty privileged if you ask me. Kinda counter to the "slave mentality" you guys keep talking about.

reply to post by smokingfretboard

JayinAR made the point that the apple refers to the ability to write and read. That lead to an awakening in consciousness. If people are illiterate it is easier to keep them enslaved, rather than god having to control the media. More work for him.
You missed my point about how severely handicapped we humans are. The gods made us smart enough to follow orders and to serve them but they did not want humans to equal to them. Equality is purely a human value, not a god given one. We want to give our children the best education and would like them to surpass us, but god does not want this for his creation. Hmmmm.
Awakening in consciousness makes slaves question orders and strive for freedom and equality. A dog cannot question orders but also it cannot work the fields or set the table for its master no matter how much you train him.

God didn't create a robot (as some of you are insinuating) and with free will, we chose other things other than God.

He did create little robots! Then, he had a fit when someone upgraded their capabilities.
We have the illusion of free will. For example, something as trivial as whether you prefer tea or coffee -or neither in my case, is determined by set of genes. Subtle things like fluctuations in the magnetic field are known to cause people to make different decisions than what they would have otherwise made. And yet they thought that they are making a decision on their own at the time. Full moon causes some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do. So if you look into the idea of free will deeper it evaporates quickly under investigation, because you have all kinds of factors influencing one's decision.
What you have is the appearance of free will.



[edit on 4-11-2009 by tungus]

dzonatas, you misinterpret Christians when you imply that we assume the right to judge others.

Change that from 'assume' to 'assumed' and maybe I won't disagree.

Touche.

the issue was that God asked us not to taste of it, and we disobeyed and did it anyway...we SINNED

Disobedience in itself is not an act of sin. Sin is the result, especially when you don't have the knowledge to prevent or resolve sin in whole to make everything and anybody 'virgin' again, away from any sin to be considered not to have sinned. Don't even expect to understand if you don't even understand that much.

The serpent was just the tempter/suggester of the issue.

The old ways of the serpent could to be have said to 'suggest' a desired order from the Order, yet not to commence such order until there is approval by an Ancient (i.e. excludes any approval from a Doctor or Military order until the Ancient approves the order.)

Doctors wanted to 'taste' the Blacker than Black, which is to say black as in if you were to figuratively 'paint it all black'.

I'm not even going to get into examples that the new ways of the serpent have became, yet hopefully it gets addressed as neopagans are SHOWN how to align/attune themselves with pagans.

if it was then even with the cross I wouldn't be able to enter heaven

You are not the only one that has had their knowledge of heaven 'painted all black'. Many don't even recognize heaven even when they are it.

Fair? (Or if you don't want to judge, than have belief/fiath of a 'higher power' of justice above any god... a sense of oneness)


[edit on 5-11-2009 by dzonatas]

Change that from 'assume' to 'assumed' and maybe I won't disagree.

Touche.

Ok that's fair

Disobedience in itself is not an act of sin. Sin is the result, especially when you don't have the knowledge to prevent or resolve sin in whole to make everything and anybody 'virgin' again, away from any sin to be considered not to have sinned. Don't even expect to understand if you don't even understand that much.

Consequences are the result of sin. Sin literally means "to miss the mark". How is disobedience not "missing the mark"? Once sin is introduced yes, you can't resolve or prevent it, but there was a time when you had that choice.

The old ways of the serpent could to be have said to 'suggest' a desired order from the Order, yet not to commence such order until there is approval by an Ancient (i.e. excludes any approval from a Doctor or Military order until the Ancient approves the order.)

What confuses me the most about your logic, is that you talk about stories in the bible as if they are true (i.e. the snake, the garden, etc) as if that's where you are drawing your conclusions, and then you disregard the ENTIRE rest of the story based on what? Based on your own suppositions of the heavenly realm...that there is more than one God, that the devil is on our side and is one with Jesus? All of which go against the entire rest of the bible. I mean, why take anything the bible says into account? Especially when your going to pick and choose what you want to hear?

You are not the only one that has had their knowledge of heaven 'painted all black'. Many don't even recognize heaven even when they are it.

And where, if I may ask, are you getting your "knowledge" of where heaven is and how it's a state of being? Once again your making suppositions, half biblical, and the other half...the more important half...from some sort of conclusion you have, not backing it with anything. I have an absolute; the bible and I'm using that as my reference for what I'm saying. You on the other hand, are picking and choosing and in so doing your canceling your own logic out, for the two sources you seem to be drawing from contradict each other. How about this. If you can give me references in the bible to back what your saying...everything your saying, then I will resign my position in the discussion. Call me skeptical, but I'd rather hold to a book that's been around for thousands of years, has legitimate historical accuracy, has prophesies that were undeniably predicted, and has millions of testers...all giving glowing reviews, over some guys attempt to "fill in the blanks" and write the rest of the story after seemingly reading the first chapter.

How does technical progress define greatness? Just because we're not omnipresent, don't soar the galaxy like star trek and don't retain knowledge like ET, doesn't define our greatness. One thing I'm seeing as a repeated pattern, is that the further we seem to advance as a civilization, the more appreciation we have for simple things. More things like companionship, love, faith and hope are esteemed. We have God's greatest trait, and that is the ability to love and be relational. In God's image! The things of this world will pass away, but faith hope and love remain. We are limited now, yes. We are in a fallen world. But those limitations will burn with the old earth. And then, we will be able to see things angels won't even be able to see. Those, trusting in Christ that is.

reply to post by JayinAR


OK, Jay, you are in there with Satan the Deceiver.

He will not save you or help you in any way.

Good luck.

Originally posted by smokingfretboard
What confuses me the most about your logic, is that you talk about stories in the bible as if they are true (i.e. the snake, the garden, etc) as if that's where you are drawing your conclusions, and then you disregard the ENTIRE rest of the story based on what? Based on your own suppositions of the heavenly realm...that there is more than one God, that the devil is on our side and is one with Jesus? All of which go against the entire rest of the bible. I mean, why take anything the bible says into account? Especially when your going to pick and choose what you want to hear?

You assumed way too much. I also suggest to study the thread, so we don't have to repeat some of the discussion or get too far off topic. This isn't a bible bash thread, so yes there is disregard for that reason and not because we don't consider it.

reply to post by smokingfretboard


Commenting on your question as to where I came up with the comparison of the knowledge of good and evil actually referring to the ability to read and write.. write... right... (haha, just thought I would try that out.)

Ummm, It is nothing more than what I have deduced by looking at all of the religious writings, or more specifically, the Genesis accounts of various cultures over the last 10 years or so.

Not that I study this stuff in earnest, but it is a hobby of mine. I have concluded that our religious inspirations were a group of "Gods" (aliens) that travelled to this planet long ago and set up a colony. I'm still not quite sure what the colony's purpose is, but I'm leaning towards a gene-splicing platform.
When looking at "good and evil" in this context, it becomes apparent to me that "good" is a slave race designed to simply carry benficial immunity type genes and "evil" becomes a race that is "equal to" the Gods themselves in potential. Or, the genes allowing mankind the ability to preserve and pass on history. Therefore, giving them the ability to advance into "godly" status.

Ummm... it fits.
It works.
It makes sense.

I think it is true.

Wow, there was quite a lag in the activity of the thread and I thought it had run its course.
This has turned out to be quite the discussion. I'm glad you guys have participated.

Thanks a lot. Lets me know that I'm not alone in these thoughts. Or that these thoughts are considered worthy of response by those that may not agree.

I wanted to come back to this thread for two reasons:

Firstly, because it is my favourite thread on ATS. Secondly, because I thought we might discuss the second tree in the garden of E.Din. The tree of eternal life. I've been thinking a lot about this lately, and then I went back and read John 6:41 - 6:66. It all fell in place then. I'm wondering if some of you might take a gander at the passages in question, and understand them the way I did.

If not, I'll be happy to come and explain myself

reply to post by DaisyAnne


Daisy, I am glad to see you again.
I think the passages you mention are noteworthy to the discussion, but I wouldn't wish to interject your words. I would rather hear them from you.

These particular passages deal with Jesus referring to what it means to be accepted into the kingdom of heaven and how his own disciples turn away from his teachings when it is said that one should live through his example.

I would enjoy hearing what you have to say about it.

reply to post by DaisyAnne


I am glad you are reviving this thread, but I do not understand the significance of the quotes.
I read a little beyond the quotes you mention and the picture I gather is this:

After saying that he came down from heaven (people grumbled because they knew him as the son of Joseph - a mortal, not god), Jesus says that the forefathers ate the manna from heaven in the desert but apparently that wasn't the real stuff because they didn't get everlasting life and still died . Then he says that he is the real deal but they have to eat him if they want an everlasting life. Oh, and they have to drink his blood, too.
OK... I find the auto cannibalist-vampireism wish a bit strange.
Evidently, most of them did so as well because the majority turned away and Jesus is left with twelve squirming apostles at this point.

What am I missing?



[edit on 3-12-2009 by tungus]

Hi guys!

OK, I'll lay down what struck me here:

Ages ago, I wrote a paper on an ancient ritual practiced all over the Near East -- the sacrifice of the god-king. The king, of divine lineage, would be ritually killed and then his followers would eat his flesh and drink his blood, whilst the god also partook of himself. In this way he communed with his followers and granted them eternal life, which was otherwise denied to human beings.

Of course this practice was outlawed by the god of Abraham; but I posit that this exact ritual is what Jesus intended to do for the Jews, against the wishes of the god of Abraham.

reply to post by DaisyAnne


I don't really follow what you are getting at here.
I mean, I understand the concept, and yes, it works theologically, but I just don't grant that much power to Jesus.

Apologies if I am misunderstanding you.

reply to post by JayinAR


I guess what I'm trying to get at is this: if the tree of knowledge was language and writing (and I do think you're right about that), then the tree of eternal life was blood. If Jesus corresponds to Azazel, as I believe he does, then he is a son of the serpent, and his "blood" would be powerful.

We can see the same thing in the myth of Adapa, where Enki tells Adapa not to eat the bread of life or drink the water of life when he ascends to see An in the heavens. Again, the flesh and blood. And the children of the sons of god with the earth women, again a craving for blood.

Just ruminating on that second tree, I suppose.

Let me put this another way to you.. "We war not against flesh and blood, but spiritual wickedness in the air"....

So what rules the airwaves huh???

Lucifer was put in a prominent place over the rest of the host of heaven, to be a "Light bringer/bearer" to G-ds ultimate creation... Us.....

So... In this world, in the whole solar system.. What drives this planet? What exulted astral feature provides warmth, photosynthesis thus vedgies to chew on? What drives our climate, water cycle and on and on??? Yes the Sun....

The electromagenetic spectrum drives everything on this planet.. Technologically, the EM spectrum drives all communications and literally rules the airwaves!!!

Funny how all past civilizations worshipped the sun huh? To the point that even now, sun plinths take pride of place in london, washington, the vatican... Who do they serve???? IT AINT G-D!!!

Funny how in the end days, the bible records that "Your sun shall shine no more," I wonder why??

The EM prince and power of the air has had his weapons taken away...

Funny also is that the bible describes stars that have "trangressed their course" are described as angels??

Just a though..... "I will be like the Most High (G-d) seems to be be the constant transmission throughout history.. Man becomming like G-d.. I wonder wher that came from???

[edit on 053131p://f29Thursday by Selahobed]

It does seem to me to be quite illogical for a "perfect, all knowing creator" to make a flawed creation (man,sin) and then make his creation responsible for that, as if it was some transgression on the creations' part. And on top of that, this creator demands your worship.....

That's why the whole god concept has never held much water with me. It's circular thought that leads to confusion and one cannot practice happiness if one goes around confused all the time.

peas

reply to post by DaisyAnne


Hey again... I see what you're saying now.
I'll have to do some reading in order to even speak with you about this, though.

I appreciate the addition to the thread!