The Fall!

[POI]

Otseng stated "Yes, I believe the fall is a thing. As for why, it is out of scope for the current discussion, but can be addressed later."

Your wish has been granted.

For debate: Outside the claim being made from an ancient human writing, why is the assertion of 'the fall' a real thing?

[Wootah]

So with the snakes in the garden, that metaphor may apply to to those with discrimination, but it totally fails in the Eden scenario, because they had no discrimination as yet. Slice it where you like, this whole story - if true - was a set -up. If not, it doesn't matter...except that it undercuts the whole concept of Sin and the need for redemption.,

But who said it had to make sense?

I do think the fall is a mirror in that we see what we want to see. I mean that seriously. It is an open question who is the good guy and who is the bad guy in that story.

It is true that we can see what we want to see, regardless of what it is the mirror actually shows.

Out of all the characters narrated in that story, which one do you most "see" yourself as?

Great question. In nearly all stories we relate to the main character. Either through recognition (I see who I am in them) or through idealisation (I want to be like that hero).

The Bible is the only story where if you see yourself as the protagonist (Jesus) you don't know yourself or know God. If you see yourself as the antagonist you are at least starting to know yourself but might not know God.

[TRANSPONDER]

If I put myselfin the position of Jesus, I immediately recoil, because I do not want to be that person. I find myself disagreeing with so much of this 'teaching' of his, I am thinking 'This can't be right'. Wheher one takes it as the views of one person back then or (as I do) the doctrines of an already evolved church, I think we can do better than that, and should.

I know - the ideals are astonishing - to love everyone as yourself, but that is why they are no good. We cannot do that apart from a few remarkable people. First we should develop tolerance of others and their different ways. In the Bible, I don't find that. I find a call for pushing the religion into everyone's face. This is not about being nice to everyone, but about being nice to everyone who thinks like that or it is hoped can be talked into becoming so. If one declines to do so, the big cheezy smile vanishes and the kite goes up; I have seen it.

[Wootah]

If I put myselfin the position of Jesus, I immediately recoil, because I do not want to be that person. I find myself disagreeing with so much of this 'teaching' of his, I am thinking 'This can't be right'. Wheher one takes it as the views of one person back then or (as I do) the doctrines of an already evolved church, I think we can do better than that, and should.

I know - the ideals are astonishing - to love everyone as yourself, but that is why they are no good. We cannot do that apart from a few remarkable people. First we should develop tolerance of others and their different ways. In the Bible, I don't find that. I find a call for pushing the religion into everyone's face. This is not about being nice to everyone, but about being nice to everyone who thinks like that or it is hoped can be talked into becoming so. If one declines to do so, the big cheezy smile vanishes and the kite goes up; I have seen it.

Jesus literally said to love God and love others.

Of course you can't do that.

That's why you need forgiveness.

Read the parable of the unforgiving servant if you like for more info.

[TRANSPONDER]

If I put myselfin the position of Jesus, I immediately recoil, because I do not want to be that person. I find myself disagreeing with so much of this 'teaching' of his, I am thinking 'This can't be right'. Wheher one takes it as the views of one person back then or (as I do) the doctrines of an already evolved church, I think we can do better than that, and should.

I know - the ideals are astonishing - to love everyone as yourself, but that is why they are no good. We cannot do that apart from a few remarkable people. First we should develop tolerance of others and their different ways. In the Bible, I don't find that. I find a call for pushing the religion into everyone's face. This is not about being nice to everyone, but about being nice to everyone who thinks like that or it is hoped can be talked into becoming so. If one declines to do so, the big cheezy smile vanishes and the kite goes up; I have seen it.

Jesus literally said to love God and love others.

Of course you can't do that.

That's why you need forgiveness.

Read the parable of the unforgiving servant if you like for more info.

No. Forgiveness is just a way of shuffling off responsibility. Thinking that going to God is the answer to our problems, is part of the problem. Do some reading for more information.

[Wootah]

If I put myselfin the position of Jesus, I immediately recoil, because I do not want to be that person. I find myself disagreeing with so much of this 'teaching' of his, I am thinking 'This can't be right'. Wheher one takes it as the views of one person back then or (as I do) the doctrines of an already evolved church, I think we can do better than that, and should.

I know - the ideals are astonishing - to love everyone as yourself, but that is why they are no good. We cannot do that apart from a few remarkable people. First we should develop tolerance of others and their different ways. In the Bible, I don't find that. I find a call for pushing the religion into everyone's face. This is not about being nice to everyone, but about being nice to everyone who thinks like that or it is hoped can be talked into becoming so. If one declines to do so, the big cheezy smile vanishes and the kite goes up; I have seen it.

Jesus literally said to love God and love others.

Of course you can't do that.

That's why you need forgiveness.

Read the parable of the unforgiving servant if you like for more info.

No. Forgiveness is just a way of shuffling off responsibility. Thinking that going to God is the answer to our problems, is part of the problem. Do some reading for more information.

Good. Shuffle off responsibility. We need freedom. Most of us carry burdens we don't need to. Say sorry. Try again.

[TRANSPONDER]

If I put myselfin the position of Jesus, I immediately recoil, because I do not want to be that person. I find myself disagreeing with so much of this 'teaching' of his, I am thinking 'This can't be right'. Wheher one takes it as the views of one person back then or (as I do) the doctrines of an already evolved church, I think we can do better than that, and should.

I know - the ideals are astonishing - to love everyone as yourself, but that is why they are no good. We cannot do that apart from a few remarkable people. First we should develop tolerance of others and their different ways. In the Bible, I don't find that. I find a call for pushing the religion into everyone's face. This is not about being nice to everyone, but about being nice to everyone who thinks like that or it is hoped can be talked into becoming so. If one declines to do so, the big cheezy smile vanishes and the kite goes up; I have seen it.

Jesus literally said to love God and love others.

Of course you can't do that.

That's why you need forgiveness.

Read the parable of the unforgiving servant if you like for more info.

No. Forgiveness is just a way of shuffling off responsibility. Thinking that going to God is the answer to our problems, is part of the problem. Do some reading for more information.

Good. Shuffle off responsibility. We need freedom. Most of us carry burdens we don't need to. Say sorry. Try again.

I don't need to because that is in line with atheist thinking. Of course we all have responsibility for our actions, and just having them 'forgiven' is deceitful and mendacious and we have to do better than that, even if it did not lead to the 'forgiven' acting like they are better than everyone else.

No, the scam and lie about which You have to think again is that 'Sin' is a religious cure for wrongdoing. Sure,, we are sick or infected with wrongdoing, and thanks, evolution. But religion purporting to sell us a fake cure (get forgiven by Jesus) is rather a nasty scam of the curative pill being habit forming. In the sense that one sins again (of course) and more forgiveness is needed (I give most Christians the credit at least of not thinking they are forgiven for anything they might yet do) and the illness is not addressed.

Because the infection of wrongdoing is biological, not religious. Atheism offers a burden - release of it's own. I know, because I have experienced it and am only now beginning to understand why. It is release from the burden of the drug, that you have to keep taking to relieve the burden. Once you shed the burden of religious demands, you will feel a freedom like no other. It is better than the illusory forgiveness for being a sinner deserving of some punishment or other (1) for which eternal top -ups is required, release from religion takers away the confining surround of billboards saying: "God!! God!! and you have the whole natural universe in your possession.

Just sayin' Of course I don't expect you to just Do It. The sick person first needs to accept that they are sick and stop the religious quack - cures and get the proper cure, which is lighter even than Jesus' balsa wood yoke and cheap. too; you just have to take the Real cure from sin, and stop paying the church for a fake cure. I haven't even touched on what it requires the faithful to do to their brains. We have seen it - science denial, evidence denial, logic denial and even denial of what is clearly stated in the Bible. Never mind scrapping honesty just to cling to Faith. Who wants that?

You may do it one day,; some do. Your choice. I'm just letting you know what it is like over here and rebutting the idea that religion releases one from anything but freedom from religion.

(1) Christians know this is bad, as they keep trying to excuse it and even sometimes reject it and opt for UR, without (so far as I have heard) facing the implication - there has to be a punishment or Christianity becomes pointless.

[William]

So with the snakes in the garden, that metaphor may apply to to those with discrimination, but it totally fails in the Eden scenario, because they had no discrimination as yet. Slice it where you like, this whole story - if true - was a set -up. If not, it doesn't matter...except that it undercuts the whole concept of Sin and the need for redemption.,

But who said it had to make sense?

I do think the fall is a mirror in that we see what we want to see. I mean that seriously. It is an open question who is the good guy and who is the bad guy in that story.

It is true that we can see what we want to see, regardless of what it is the mirror actually shows.

Out of all the characters narrated in that story, which one do you most "see" yourself as?

Great question. In nearly all stories we relate to the main character. Either through recognition (I see who I am in them) or through idealisation (I want to be like that hero).

That is a human tendency, agreed.

The Bible is the only story where if you see yourself as the protagonist (Jesus) you don't know yourself or know God.

Whereas, (I would say/suggest) if one "sees" oneself as "The Christ" one has some unpacking to do in relation to understanding "God" (what it is like to be the source-mind of all creation) through understanding "Christ-Consciousness" - intimately.

If you see yourself as the antagonist you are at least starting to know yourself but might not know God.

From what you have expressed (how you have expressed it) either option won't get one any closer to understanding God/The Mind of creation.
I am not sure that is what you were trying to express though...

Getting back to the story (The Fall/Adam and Eve et al) it may be the individuals task to try and understand the story from all the perspectives of the characters involved - in order to attempt to bring these together.

I find that the Jungian Archetypes are an essential tool/device for helping one achieve that.

I also think that being a human consciousness gives me the opportunity (and even the ability) to succeed in the eventual/wholesome understanding of both the human predicament and acceptance of said predicament.

[Wootah]

[Replying to William in post #17]

Jungian archetypes are great. Just remember that came a long time after the Bible.

What predicament do you feel inclined to accept?

[Wootah]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #16]

Look at you fighting the weeds in your garden. Keeping snakes out, keeping guard against bad ideas.

Stop taking the fall so seriously .... .

...

Actually that is why the fall is so central. It sits below the foundations of our thoughts. Even the devil does gardening trying to kill off the Messiah.

[William]

From what you have expressed (how you have expressed it) either option won't get one any closer to understanding God/The Mind of creation.
I am not sure that is what you were trying to express though...

Getting back to the story (The Fall/Adam and Eve et al) it may be the individuals task to try and understand the story from all the perspectives of the characters involved - in order to attempt to bring these together.

I find that the Jungian Archetypes are an essential tool/device for helping one achieve that.

[Replying to William in post #17]

Jungian archetypes are great. Just remember that came a long time after the Bible.

On the contrary, what I incorporate into the equation are that the JA are an attempt to explain happenings within human minds (and the consequences of those happenings being externalized) so what I keep in mind ('remember') is that the human mind existed long before the bible and the stories which make up the book are a consequence of said mindfulness, not the other way around.

I also think that being a human consciousness gives me the opportunity (and even the ability) to succeed in the eventual/wholesome understanding of both the human predicament and acceptance of said predicament.

What predicament do you feel inclined to accept?

Every predicament (situation/experience) I am experiencing as a human mind (personality).