Subnostr

Ha, accused. Not very subtle, Alan...

pretty sure the text was like "God saw adam had a lap-lap made of leaves and asked him questions"

also i'm not sure how allegorical everything is up until the ejection from the agriculture training camp

if you read some apocrypha you will learn that actually in some versions Adam was there to do a doctorate in agriculture and somewhere around the middle he gets caught stealing things and after that point they stop teaching him and then they get kept out of the camp after that

i forget which one had it much like that, i think The Book of Jasher explains that Adam was there for 7 years, and he wasn't instantly ejected after robbing from it

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Comte de Sats Germain 1y ago

7 is always symbolic. It could mean he was there a long time, or that he wasn't actually there at all, because 7 is symbolic of self, especially the male self.

The way I interpret Eden is, its a controlled experiment to see if the participant is sentient. If you created a being - a robot maybe - and your goal is true sentience, then you couldn't just ask it if its sentient, and the Turing test wouldn't work because a good fake is still a fake. You would need to set up conditions where the created being is responding to stimuli and incentives, and most importantly, generating its own creative responses. The goal is to get him to feel embarrassment and lie. But you can't program it to lie - it has to be authentic, self generated. That's the only way I can think of to know if a thing is actually sentient.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

yeah, my judgement on this is still in uncertainty

teh story that Apocalypse of Yajnavalkya presents is that Adam was a selected student plucked from out of the northeast region to propagate agriculture to the hunter gatherers

my understanding of taoism and non-intervention kinda has some quibbles with the idea of the wise "picking out a student" story

but at some level all of this stuff has a concrete grounding in real events, my query is not about the fact of something happening and it having relevance to history so much as what exactly happened

for me the differences between the Jasher and Genesis versions of the "stealing of the blessing" story around Isaac/Rebecca/Jacob/Esau thing is super sniffy

like, am i supposed to admire any of these characters? seems like esau is a spoilt child and isaac is deluded (i forget just now upon which point made him vulnerable to this) and jacob was probably naturally shy and not aggressive and rebecca maybe she was just getting jacob to realise that his dad was being a bitch?

there's enough divergence of the interpretation in the text between the versions i've seen now that i'm almost certain there is a different factual history behind it than any of the versions, and then let's talk about the Abraham and Isaac sacrifice story?

I mean... really? you really have to stretch your definitions of a lot of things to accept any of this stuff as being either factual or virtuous

i'm much more ready to believe that adam and his whole storyline was more a case of a high tech civilisation that kept a strong boundary up and let a few in and this was the story of one of the clever hunters who got accepted to train how to raise plants and animals properly so he could spread this to raise up the rest of the tribes around him

and that The Lord was actually these same people who were actively following their students and mentoring them

this i can get into, i can't get into the literal version, the literal version is too much :wtf: for me

i can neither believe that "God" who speaks or "The Lord" more frequently the text's depiction, was actually the Creator, nor can i believe that ... i mean, actually read genesis chapter 1 in light of knowledge of physics, the very concept of "Firmament" is extremely weird and vague, like is it the sky, is it the core of the planet?

it seems much more reasonable to me that this was just a mangled, short, kids version of Corpus Hermetika... and Vishnu Purana also has a similar beginning text as does Genesis 1 and the first part of Corpus Hermetika, and to be honest, Timeaus also has a lot in common in the way the text unfolds a story about the elaboration of a model of physical reality

Comte de Sats Germain 1y ago

Part of this is part of why I'm so against Zionism. Yeah, the people in the old testament frankly a bunch of fuckers. To me, it seems like the only reason for the chosen people to be chosen is because they are literally the worst people on the planet. What could be more meaningful than to take the absolute worst people and use them as the vehicle of redemption for all of humanity? And they're still the worst, if we must insist that everyone calling themselves Jews are actually Jews. They are not. That name is reserved for people who have a special relationship with God, and a people who commit genocide or rob the world via usury are not in a relationship with God, they are mocking the name of Jew and the people who actually have a right to the name, who, according to Paul, are believers in Christ.

A little bit of venting here. I don't dislike them. I'm not one of those. I just don't think the people in Israel are them.

But I'm also frustrated with Christians for apparently never bothering to read past the Gospels.

Eh... People.

Comte de Sats Germain 1y ago

Did a little digging, got this:

Zayin is the 7th Hebrew letter. Ancient Hebrew evolved out of pictograms. Zayin is the sword. The sword in the bible is often symbolic of rationality. So Adam was in Eden for the amount of time it took to become rational. Also some kind of farming connotation.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

yeah, this all lines up with the hermetic texts as well, and also points towards the idea that the gnostic from of christianity is more correct (much like zen, in so many ways too)

i probably need to finish up reading Jasher and Genesis and then put Hermetika next to it and meditate, because i think there could well be a symbology deep through it

i just can't buy the timeline that is expressed in it, because of the lack of geological evidence backing that timeline (ie, the great flood only 4500 years ago) because while carbon dating is bullshit, the aging of rocks is not, and there is tons of very strong corroborating evidence about the ages of rocks and the signs of cold and warm climate periods and whatnot, and the nearest dating for the great flood is literally 12000 years ago and this also lines up with the idea that the sun has a micronova about on this cycle in recent times because of a relatively recently discovered magnetic oscillation that has been detected and a model is now building up about this

this is the narrative presented in Yajnavalkya also, and it also bases part of this on several other points though i think it is wrong in that it asserts that the great flood was caused by meteors, but the "great dragon" of a low atmosphere very large impactor causing the desertification of the Sahara does seem reasonable, and doubly so when it also coincides with the ending of a cold period (changing albedo altering the climate due to baking the ground) and the coincidence of old american indian stories about the impact and the formation of a massive lake in the crater

i'm of the opinion that the full story is still to be determined, but we are getting a lot closer to it

and in any case, this "great transformation" and the "end times" are actually at hand, because the magnetic fields are changing and probably a lot of aurora photos are gonna show up in the next day or two to confirm that a pissy small sun-burp is yet again causing a massive charging of the upper atmosphere with electrons causing the argon and neon to light up

Comte de Sats Germain 1y ago

Yeah I wanna see those aurorae pics. Very curious to see how strong and how far from the poles it'll be visible.

I don't think the flood was literally flowing water. We know for certain that most of the earth has been covered in ice, which is water, several times, and many if those times while homo sapiens have been here.

Africa becomes jungly when the earth is hotter - the heat causes increased evaporation off the ocean, which dumps over land. So there's an easy way to mess with the CO2 narrative - periods of low CO2 cause desertification, as the Sahara proves. Supposedly. I can believe ice cores, but there's no ice cores in north africa.

The bible leaves a couple really good clues about the Ark. One is the fact that it has exactly the same design as a synagogue. This is something I need to do more research on, because I suspect synagogues have the same layout as Egyptian temples. Even if not, it symbolically links the physical church with refuge, which is pretty cool.

And another weird clue is, the inside of the ark is bigger than the outside. So if this is a physical thing, its bending space or something. It makes me wonder if its the same ark they dragged around the desert was what Noah used to skip the "flood." That would make the part with directions on how to build the ark an embellishment, and there are scholars that specialize in spotting embellishments in parts of the bible. So there could be ways to test the hypothesis.