/lit/ - Literature

No, it was questioning authority. It’s a children's morality play for their obedience

>>17484820
fuck off, shitters

>>17484854
Lose consciousness

The great sin was literally ingesting satan into god's creation that it become part of its constitution

>>17484820
>>17484796

Neti neti. These are both incorrect and give too much towards Gnosticism, satanism, atheism and are blatantly a-historical.

If you want the meaning of the Tree of knowledge you need to go and look at the Hebrew terms used.

The tree is called the Tree of the Daat(experience, knowledge as not abstract knowledge but rather, akin to knowing something in experience) of Tov(not Goodness, but rather Wealth, decadence, great richness, etc) and Re(not Evil, but suffering, sorrow, poverty, evil as an experience.) thus the tree did not give them abstract knowledge or open their eyes to anything they mentally weren’t aware of, for eve argued that to eat from the fruit was bad because she would die, and she was convinced to eat of the fruit because she was told that it would induce Good in the abstract sense.

So what is it that this tree really is? The tree of the experience of extremes, of imbalance, of duality, in truth the thing that the tree Gave was the experience of total and utter poverty and of the experience of Decadent over-abundance. This is not some Promethean Gnosis, this is not some rescue, rather this is absolute experience of bondage, the mind trapped into dualistic conceptions and bound to suffering in creation, and this is the very root of the experience of Evil in both ways in our experiences. This is why Christ who died upon the cross needed to die upon it, for in his incorruptible body did sin and death enter, and his body being incorruptible rather transmuted these, converting Sin(an archery term, it means missing the mark therefore imperfection) and Death into Holiness and life. thus the Cross is the true tree of Life, from Christ flows the living water and blood which reconciles man to the primal nature of reality, it is only by Christ that this is done.

If you disagree with me, look at Isaiah 45:7
Isaiah 45:7

7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

This word, evil is in Hebrew Re, all traditional Hebrew and Christian commentaries state that this is suffering and chaos and not moral evil that is being spoken of here.

>enter thread
>see braindead tripfags
>exit thread

>>17484796
It's about abandoning the nondual state and assigning objective value to dualism.
>>17484820
No, that was Satan's fall. The lower rebels against the higher and is therefore destroyed, etc.

>>17484872
So essentially it's the tree of entropy? There's an interesting comparison to be made between the Hebrew account and the Islamic account if that's true, since it's explicitly the tree of immortality. I wonder how that reflects on the two traditions in general.

>>17484820
lol imagine unironically giving this 15 year old on r/atheism tier take. genuinely embarrassing post

>>17484886
what if everyone on /lit/ whose not a tripfag is actually a tripfag posting anonymously?

>>17484932
since it's explicitly the tree of immortality in the Quran*

>>17484932
Not quite, fundamentally this anon >>17484904

Is correct, it’s the tree of imbalance in experience, dualistic extremes. In early and modern Kabbalistic judaism which doesn’t see the serpent as Satan or as explicitly Satan, they see the serpent as the symbol for the range of phenomena, its slithering representative of extremes, going up and down up and down. It can be said that this is entropy in the sense of temporality, limitation in time, but the most precise definition is dualistic imbalanced extremes. The tree of experience of duality.

This is easily demonstrated by the fact that Eve had abstract knowledge of good and evil enough to discuss it with the serpent and reason she ought to do it with for power/knowledge, to be as if God. See David chaim smith’s Kabbalistic mirror of genesis as a citation for the serpent as extremes.

>>17484820
So this is the power of female intellectualism

>>17484796
That's a gnostic lie.

>>17484932
there are two trees

>>17484932
>>17485050

Also yeah, instead of the Sidrat al-Muntaha or the Shajarat al-Khold, were told of the etz chaim, the tree of life/living. Which produces immortality. That’s what I refer to when I say

> thus the Cross is the true tree of Life, from Christ flows the living water and blood which reconciles man to the primal nature of reality, it is only by Christ that this is done.

>>17484796
The First Sin is a metaphor for gaining consciousness, yes, but the idea of the First Sin is that by gaining consciousness, we also gained morality, shame, and dignity. From there, God was displeased that we had the arrogance to place ourselves on the same field as he, and to walk the path of gaining experience and wisdom as he did, and so he banished mankind from the Garden of Eden, or to be more clear, blissful ignorance. We left the protective cradle of ignorance, and our Father condemned us to our choice. Or at least, that's how I read into it.

>>17484998
>Pretending an ancient Hebrew myth means something more than it’s clear morality tale
Heresy

>>17485050
I know, I was making the comparison to how in the Hebrew tradition there are two, and in the Islamic tradition there is only one.

>>17484796
theres a lot of interpretations but many boil down to either the gnostic OT god is bad and knowledge is good or the christian OT god is good and he kept knowledge secret because he knew it would hurt us

>>17484872
How does Revelation fit into this cosmology, where Humanity returns to Eden with God the Father, God the Son (the lamb), and God the Spirit (the living water), ruling over the new heavens and new earth? Does humanity somehow grow from it’s experience of putting so much emphasis on dualistic extremes? And how does the incarnation fit into this?

>>17485116
Depends on the model of abrahamicism, in lurianic Judaism this specifically happens as a scheme by Zeir anpin/Adam kadmon as a way of accelerating the creation process and the proximity of creation to Godhead, so while this is temporarily bad in the long term it was beneficial as the sum of all souls are just the being of Adam kadmon, no one truly being lost or suffering that did not choose this fate.

As for revelation in Christianity, it kinda depends, there is a large theme that the fall ultimately was good and a part of god’s design for creation, for by the fall we are able to be redeemed and no longer just as some creation but as direct son’s of god, the bride of the Christ himself.

Also the Holy Spirit is more often represented by the seven lamps before God’s throne which are the seven spirits of god in Isaiah and within revelation.

But to Tldr, no matter how Calvinist or free will based the Christian is, in general it is agreed that the Good of the fall and the dualism, is the relationship with Christ. The general Christian argument is that there is a unity greater than normative monism or oneness and that is Love induced nondualism, known as perichoresis within Christianity which describes the relation of the trinity but also the church in god.

John 14:20

20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

This is the benefit of the fall and coming of Christ; instead Of man just being a creation who has the image of god(agreed upon by all traditional Christian and Jewish commentaries to be reason) we also have marriage and Nonduality within the unity of God. Thus we are divided for love’s sake and reunited for Love. Love of God for man and Love of man for God, Love is the entirety of the Christian doctrine. Love producing creation by love and through love, creating man for and by love, and then redeeming man through this same love by love itself (Christ) being born, who gives the ultimate commandment of Love, and upon the day of heavenly Zion upon earth, eternal love shall be entirety manifest within time.

>>17484820
i think of you as a cringe generator

>>17485178
Okay so you’re saying the Trinity is a sort of non-dualistic state? Can you elaborate on that?

>>17485530
The normative Christian doctrine is that the three persons of God head are one in divinity but three persons, ever unified but not confused, not a static oneness but rather an interpenetration. In the Christian tradition this kind of unity is understood to be even more unified than a singular static Monad. How so? I shall quote Hegel who’s drawing from the Christian mystic Jacob boehme.

“When we say, “God is love,” we are saying something very great and true. But it would be senseless to grasp this saying in a simple-minded way as a simple definition, without analyzing what love is. For love is a distinguishing of two, who nevertheless are absolutely not distinguished for each other. The consciousness or feeling of the identity of the two – to be outside of myself and in the other – this is love.”

Thus this is the nature of Love which we identify with the inherent nature of Godhead and divinity from before creation and in eternity, God in his self relation as Lover, loved and the Love between, the whole creation being an act of love born of God’s self love and love of all of his properties, which occurs automatically within time as God is unchanging he is necessarily always father, creator, messiah, prince of peace and any other title you can imagine.

Early Christian mystics and theologians will argue that the trinity of persons is a manifest appearance whereas the Divinity behind them is an inert unity which automatically makes the three necessary (see Dionysius and also some readings of aquinas) others argue apophatic arguments that such is impossible to know, others argue in more heretical modes that it is an avatar or emanation system and some aspects of godhead are elder, some would argue all three persons of the Godhead are only technically divided for our sake due to incomprehensible unity.

Any of these you choose, Christ states by entering the church, by his death and resurrection, by becoming his bride we enter into this same Nondual unity as the three persons partake of. We do not “become God” in the sense of gaining his persons, but rather we become one of the persons within the Godhead, distinct but through love we are unified. This fuses beautifully with platonic conceptions in the writings of St athanasius in his on the incarnation, who tells us that Christ is perfect reason and wisdom, the image of god is reason and that by reflecting/contemplating/proximity to Christ our reason like a mirror is cleaned and we can perfectly reflect the light of God. In this regard Christianity preaches a Nonduality through love but not a confusion or dissolution in Nonduality. Rather fullness of being and perfection is attained.

>>17484820
what a small brain take
expected of a woman

>>17485530
Here’s a diagram from Jacob boehme, the Father herein is the unknowable aspects of Godhead which are yet to manifest (think of how Hegel deals with Kant’s noumena, it’s the same calculation.)

The Christ herein is rationalization, to quote boehme, that which is actual is rational and that which is rational is actual, this ties into Plato’s Timaeus, Christ is the craftsman because the logos/divine reason manifests the hidden qualities and aspects of godhead through history through an unfoldment process.

Finally the Holy Spirit is a unity pervading all phenomenal being, all creation, both separate to creation but pervading it as the interior life within it, the animating force, the harmony and unity behind it, the spirit hidden in Being, the very spirit of the absolute manifesting himself throughout time. I shall once again quote Hegel as his system is fundamentally not different from the Christian mysticism of boehme which itself is just an unveiling of the same biblical doctrines.


Φ 807. All the same, this relinquishment (externalization) of self is still incomplete. This process expresses the relation of the certainty of its self to the object, an object which, just by being in a relation, has not yet attained its full freedom. Knowledge is aware not only of itself, but also of the negative of itself, or its limit. Knowing its limit means knowing how to sacrifice itself. This sacrifice is the self-abandonment, in which Spirit sets forth, in the form of free fortuitous happening, its process of becoming Spirit, intuitively apprehending outside it its pure self as Time, and likewise its existence as Space.(11) This last form into which Spirit passes, Nature, is its living immediate process of development. Nature-Spirit divested of self (externalized) – is, in its actual existence, nothing but this eternal process of abandoning its (Nature's) own independent subsistence, and the movement which reinstates Subject.
Φ 808. The other aspect, however, in which Spirit comes into being, History, is the process of becoming in terms of knowledge, a conscious self-mediating process – Spirit externalized and emptied into Time. But this form of abandonment is, similarly, the emptying of itself by itself; the negative is negative of itself. This way of becoming presents a slow procession and succession of spiritual shapes (Geistern), a gallery of pictures, each of which is endowed with the entire wealth of Spirit, and moves so slowly just for the reason that the self has to permeate and assimilate all this wealth of its substance. Since its accomplishment consists in Spirit knowing what it is,

Cont

>>17485594
And what do you believe? You seem really knowledgeable in the esoteric sides of Judaism/Christianity and Gnosticism.

>>17485638
in fully comprehending its substance, this knowledge means its concentrating itself on itself (Insichgehen), a state in which Spirit leaves its external existence behind and gives its embodiment over to Recollection (Erinnerung). In thus concentrating itself on itself, Spirit is engulfed in the night of its own self-consciousness; its vanished existence is, however, conserved therein; and this superseded existence – the previous state, but born anew from the womb of knowledge – is the new stage of existence, a new world, and a new embodiment or mode of Spirit. Here it has to begin all over again at its

immediacy,(12) as freshly as before, and thence rise once more to the measure of its stature, as if , for it, all that preceded were lost, and as if it had learned nothing from the experience of the spirits that preceded. But re-collection (Er-innerung) has conserved that experience. and is the inner being, and, in fact, the higher form of the substance. While, then, this phase of Spirit begins all over again its formative development, apparently starting solely from itself, yet at the same time it commences at a higher level. The realm of spirits developed in this way, and assuming definite shape in existence, constitutes a succession, where one detaches and sets loose the other, and each takes over from its predecessor the empire of the spiritual world. The goal of the process is the revelation of the depth of spiritual life, and this is the Absolute Notion. This revelation consequently means superseding its “depth”, is its “extension” or spatial embodiment, the negation of this inwardly self-centred (insichseiend) ego – a negativity which is its self-relinquishment, its externalization, or its substance: and this revelation is also its temporal embodiment, in that this externalization in its very nature relinquishes (externalizes) itself, and so exists at once in its spatial extension” as well as in its “depth” or the self. The goal, which is Absolute Knowledge or Spirit knowing itself as Spirit, finds its pathway in the recollection of spiritual forms (Geister) as they are in themselves and as they accomplish the organization of their spiritual kingdom. Their conservation, looked at from the side of their free existence appearing in the form of contingency, is History; looked at from the side of their intellectually comprehended organization, it is the Science of the ways in which knowledge appears.(13) Both together, or History (intellectually) comprehended (begriffen), form at once the recollection and the Golgotha of Absolute Spirit, the reality, the truth, the certainty of its throne, without which it were lifeless, solitary, and alone. Only
The chalice of this realm of spirits
Foams forth to God His own Infinitude(14)

>>17484796
How tf did she shave her pubes?

>>17485638
Okay so that’s what people mean when they say “From the Father, through the Son, and in the Spirit,” correct?

I’ve also heard some people saying that Jesus is the perfect ‘form’ of the Father that makes the unknown known to us (via John 1:18,) and hence He is equal to the Father since the Father’s form must be equal to the Father Himself.

>>17485639
Long question, I have my own ontology and phenomenology and theology which runs over 80 pages, but to summarize I am a Protestant mystic, I am a Rosicrucian, and in the style of the early church (st Justin martyr and so forth) I study and integrate world religion mad philosophy not as a kind of perennialism, but rather understanding that God has placed his image in all men and that by self contemplation, all religions may reflect this internal nature of the imprint of godhead, some more dimly some more accurately, and I believe it is right to take these bits of gold and rip them from their systems and bring them into Christianity, as all that is good belongs to Christ. Just as the early church integrated Platonism, I have studied and integrated Platonism/Neoplatonism, Hinduism especially Kashmir shivaism/tantra, Taoism especially mao Shan, Shingon, aspects of Vajrayana/dzogchen, hermeticism, Roman and Greek and Norse paganism, in the style of William Blake, various poetic and artistic elaborations, western occultism as a whole, Kabbalah, relevant aspects of Sufism, continental philosophy, aspects of relevant post modern philosophy, laruelle’s non-philosophy, and so on and so forth. You get the idea. Christ is the key to it all, my take on the Bible adheres to the Pardes interpretation method.

I’ll quote wikipedia on what that is.

"Pardes" refers to (types of) approaches to biblical exegesis in rabbinic Judaism or to interpretation of text in Torah study. The term, sometimes also rendered PaRDeS, is an acronym formed from the initials of the following four approaches:

Peshat (פְּשָׁט) – "surface" ("straight") or the literal (direct) meaning.[1]
Remez (רֶמֶז) – "hints" or the deep (allegoric: hidden or symbolic) meaning beyond just the literal sense.
Derash (דְּרַשׁ) – from Hebrew darash: "inquire" ("seek") – the comparative (midrashic) meaning, as given through similar occurrences.
Sod (סוֹד) (pronounced with a long O as in 'lore') – "secret" ("mystery") or the esoteric/mystical meaning, as given through inspiration or revelation.
Each type of Pardes interpretation examines the extended meaning of a text. As a general rule, the extended meaning never contradicts the base meaning.[2] The Peshat means the plain or contextual meaning of the text. Remez is the allegorical meaning. Derash includes the metaphorical meaning, and Sod represents the hidden meaning. There is often considerable overlap, for example when legal understandings of a verse are influenced by mystical interpretations or when a "hint" is determined by comparing a word with other instances of the same word”

Thus I believe in every aspect of the Bible and just as Origen, I also believe the Bible is like a veil through which we the bride may look at our bridegroom and the more we look, the more we can glimpse the face of Christ, the face of the absolute, endless wisdom, thus the scripture has infinite knowledge.

>>17485093
im not even a christfag but i just dont understand how you can be this lacking in self awareness, are you literally incapable of introspection? its so blatantly obvious that you've opted most childish and intellectually barren interpretation of the book you could have possibly come up with solely because it makes you feel better about yourself or justified in something like a child lashing out. calling it a 'shallow surface level" take would be giving you too much credit considering you didn't even get that far, you literally just saw "authority figure says something" and that's about as far as you got

do you actually think posting something this blatantly petty and willfully ignorant makes you seem cool or intelligent lol? grow up

>>17485668
>Okay so that’s what people mean when they say “From the Father, through the Son, and in the Spirit,” correct

Correct.

As for Christ being the perfect form of the father, no, the father is already perfect, but yes Christ makes him known to us. The allegory one should think of is that the father is flame, Christ is light and the Holy Spirit is our experience/perception of the light,

Or the father is light, the Christ is a mirror and the Holy Spirit is that same light being casted upon us reflected off of the mirror.

We must remember to not confuse the persons of Godhead just as we do not confuse the flame and its light and our perception of the light within the eye.

2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Colossians 1:15-20

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Ephesians 4:6


one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all

>>17485725
>perfect form of the father
I mean I didn’t mean in a platonic sense, but Jesus being the exact representation of the father’s being as Paul put it in Hebrews.

>>17485756
Ah, perfect mirror, yes.

>>17485725
>We must remember to not confuse the persons of Godhead just as we do not confuse the flame and its light and our perception of the light within the eye.
And we shouldn’t fall into heresies such as Arianism, either. We should remember that the ‘light’ has been eternally begotten from the flame before all ages, with there never being a time where the light was not.

>>17484820

>>17484820
>It's better to have sinned and repented than to have never sinned at all
>hurr Christianity is all about fascist obediance

>>17485781
Of course, which is why I say

> inherent nature of Godhead and divinity from before creation and in eternity, God in his self relation as Lover, loved and the Love between, the whole creation being an act of love born of God’s self love and love of all of his properties, which occurs automatically within time as God is unchanging he is necessarily always father, creator, messiah, prince of peace and any other title you can imagine.

The Godhead exists perfectly and complete within eternity and is not subject to time/creation, only time and we ourselves experience an unfolding of God within time.

>>17485774
Oh, and now this just came to my mind. What do you think of the Apocrypha? The Wisdom of Solomon repeats this point in 7:26
>For she is a reflection of eternal light,
a spotless mirror of the working of God,
and an image of his goodness.

>>17485687
Can you post those 80 pages in a pdf?

>>17485687
>I also believe the Bible is like a veil through which we the bride may look at our bridegroom and the more we look, the more we can glimpse the face of Christ, the face of the absolute, endless wisdom, thus the scripture has infinite knowledge.
How do you believe this is mostly done? Through reading Scripture? Contemplation? Prayer? Communion with believers? Solidarity with the downtrodden?
How do you do it yourself? How do you practice your relationship with God?

>>17484820
Im sorry butters but this is genuinely the most embarrassing thing you've posted to date even from a purely secular perspective

>here we have a piece of literature rich with metaphor relating to the human experience. this passage seems to relate to how human development crossed a threshold and separated us from the perfection of the natural world, and now we must pay the price in the form of animal instincts that conflict with living in an intellectual civilization which can lead to self destructive behavior like greedy capitalists destroying nature or fatties eating themselves to death etc.

>actually no, there's an authority figure mentioned so im just going to ignore every single detail but that one and pretend theres nothing else here

Either you are intellectually stunted to an extreme degree and incapable of even basic surface level analysis of literature, or your post is an intentionally incorrect interpretation meant solely as a teenage act of rebellion because the mean adults dont let you eat icecream for every meal. Im curious, which is it?

>>17485797
I consider it a source of wisdom but do not give it absolute authority nor belief as I would the Bible. We also do not need the apocrypha for this doctrine.

Proverbs 8:22
The LORD formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else

These words add spoken by wisdom

1 Corinthians 1:24

but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God

Isaiah 11:1-2

11 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;

Revelation 1:4: John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
Revelation 3:1: And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.
Revelation 4:5: And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.
Revelation 5:6: And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.

The seven horns and seven eyes referring to Christ being filled with the Holy Spirit upon his baptism and thus man through Christ having access to the entirety of the spirit of god, this is also referred to as the seven eyed stone.

Zechariah 3:9
For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day

>>17485687
>I believe it is right to take these bits of gold and rip them from their systems and bring them into Christianity, as all that is good belongs to Christ
Paul himself taught to make all thoughts obedient to Christ. I think you have an interesting philosophy here.

>>17485838
>The LORD formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else
I prefer the KJV translation which says ‘The Lord possessed me before the ways of his works’ or something like that, considering many heretics like Jehovah Witnesses like to use this verse to support their form of Arianism. However it is ironic since Justin Martyr used this verse to show the pre-existent nature of Christ and His eternal begetting (I.e., just in this chapter or the one before or after it, Solomon says Wisdom was actually in the metaphorical womb of God and was brought forth before creation, hence exemplifying the ‘eternal begetting’ of the Son.)

>>17485807
I hate to be a shill but I’ve written it all done in a blog site, which serves as my diary, read the soseinology section beginning with the oldest to the newest and that’ll explore my system properly. I’ll link it. Kaaba of 237 is the oldest post.

https://pastebin.com/tiCSYRhh

A warning, it’s written in a ton of jargon and references as I wrote it for my own personal usage as a diary entry same to the rest of the writing. The “on the trinity” article is written in a tad bit easier style if you do decide to read it, scroll down to the analysis section of that particular article.

>>17485818
I believe god is person and not machine, thus we gain knowledge of god through a living relationship with God, chiefly through study of His word, prayer, fasting, church, mirroring Christ in our daily life towards how we act with others and holy contemplation of the mysteries of god, but truly it is done through how love of God leads you, as the voice of Christ leads you. I recommend a beginner text like brother Lawrence but honestly the words of Christ are enough instruction on how to have your walk with Christ be a living walk.

>>17484872

a good post by a tripfag? my god

>>17485838
>For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day
This is actually really interesting since in the same chapter The Angel of the LORD (a figure many ancient church fathers believed was the incarnate Christ) speaks to Joshua. Perhaps this is pointing to the Incarnation?

>>17485871
Well yeah, John 1:18 “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”

Imo, the doctrine of interpenetration is key.

>>17485850
Totally, there’s Also essays floating around demonstrating how Paul would use Jewish exegesis techniques, Aristotelian arguments, allusions to Greek myth when relevant and would cite or mock Greek philosophers when relevant. Daniel bonevac also has some lectures on the topic.

>>17485892
I am firmly of the believe that the melekh ha YHVH, (angel of the lord) is the pre-incarnate Christ which we simply weren’t able to comprehend, this is the logical explanation for why in exodus he is both called the angel of the lord and also the lord, and why he is bowed to and does not rebuke for the bowing.

>>17485874
>I believe god is person and not machine, thus we gain knowledge of god through a living relationship with God, chiefly through study of His word, prayer, fasting, church, mirroring Christ in our daily life towards how we act with others and holy contemplation of the mysteries of god, but truly it is done through how love of God leads you, as the voice of Christ leads you. I recommend a beginner text like brother Lawrence but honestly the words of Christ are enough instruction on how to have your walk with Christ be a living walk.
Thanks for the rec and for your effortposting as always, Frater. May God repay you. Gonna pray for you tonight.

>>17485940
Thanks anon, if you would desire I pray for you, while I have no special favor with god I certainly have faith if I or any other ask God with faith it will be done, so if you desire Anon I will pray for you as well. Same goes out to any of the other anons who ask.

>>17484945
What if all tripfags are the same person?

>>17485952
Yes please. For the retention of wisdom. God has disciplined me much, but I quickly forget His lessons. Pray for mercy for my forgetful heart.

>>17486052
Jeremiah 33:2-3
2 “This is what the Lord says, he who made the earth, the Lord who formed it and established it—the Lord is his name: 3 ‘Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know.’


My friend, there is no treasure greater than wisdom and knowledge, for these treasures are from God and are his very spirit, if you ask God for his knowledge, for his spirit, he shall always grant it to you in accordance with your capacity. We must remember friend not to have pride nor to have pride in our own weakness, Moses could hardly speak and lacked elegance and his speeches elegance and his writing now lives forever. Similarly Solomon asked for wisdom and was blessed beyond any other human (other than Christ whom is God) to be the most wise. In this same regard if you ask Christ for wisdom and I certainly will for you also, I know if you have faith in these things he will grant it.

If you’ve never read it or perhaps have forgotten it, please read Hebrews 11 which gives us what the greats have done through faith and through the asking of it, I believe the same God who did those things may do for us all of that and much more if we ask with Faith and it accords with his Will.

>>17484796
It was science and technology (knowledge). Bugmen want to become immortal space-traveling transhuman “gods”.

>>17486082
>My friend, there is no treasure greater than wisdom and knowledge, for these treasures are from God
Colossians 2:2-3
My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

>>17485837
>seems to relate to how human development crossed a threshold
As all children do when they learn to never question their until they’re ready to move pit of their house. I suppose you can graphed on the rest once exposed to the Epic of Gilgamesh

>>17485791
Parental
>17485688
*rofl*

>>17484820
Why else did they feel guilty for being naked? Because they stopped being animals and started being human. The apple was the evolutionary spark of higher order consciousness.

Retard.

>>17484820
You're such a godamn caricature. You're like a perpetual 14 teen your old you know that?

>>17486082
Thanks for posting with such detail. My dad reads the bible a lot and when I was younger I'd go to church (Christian Orthodox).

You put things in a new perspective that most people can't even touch and I appreciate reading your replies.

Saved the link, will have to check it out at some point. Give me a quick mention in your prayers, God be with you.

>>17484796
That's a funny way to say "agriculture"

>>17486365
Not a problem friend, I’ll be sure too. Once more I totally understand if you find the link to be schizo tier ranting, it’s unironically my diary.

In any case I wish you and all of the anons to draw closer to Christ, and I hope I grow much stronger in Christ continuously.

>>17484820
still hasn't been refuted! the first sin was the bitch stealing the fucking apple. God said "y'all can do whatever you want just don't steal the apple." then bitch stole the apple. you can talk about symbolism and metaphor all you want, but before any of that is the simple fact that she was meant to be obedient and instead she yolo'd.

>>17486378
Thank you for your quality posts. I usually don't read from tripfags. God bless you

>>17486378
Unfiltered thoughts are the best though.

Thank you kind sir!

>>17486378
Quite literally one of the best posters here. Please come back for sure. Had my own breakthroughs with God some time ago, similar to what you've said. My life changed as he revealed my identity as a husband, father, author, and entrepreneur where before I was a spiralling mess. I try to humbly live my identity as stated, thanking Christ for his mercy and forgiveness. I now have a wife, a kid on the way, a house, 2 books written, crypto investments and dozens of books planned for several series.

>>17484820
yikes

>>17485874
Hey man, what does all that spironomy math mean? And what is a magical computer?

>>17486821
Thanks anon.

>>17486872
The Spiral is a complex topic related to my view of time and the alchemical/hermetic symbolism of the macrocosm, microcosm, their relationship, and so forth. Too much to get into here.

As for the magical computer, that’s allegorical, Computers run on ones and zeros, the dialectic of creation is being and nothing, naught and one. Dressing your ideas in various aesthetics is useful because you can look into various fields and get inspiration. You’re really not gonna be able to understand the latter posts without the prior except a few exceptions, and those also assume you’ve read various lit already.

>>17484872
Interesting post, but I disagree.

The eating of the apple really marks the jiva (soul) rising out into a veil of temporal dream-like reality projected by Maya and thus becoming beguiled by that projection it thereby mistakes it for its own lived reality. It did so through mistakenly interpreting the body that it has "appeared" to incarnate in as being "it's body", therefore identifying with separation and reifying a false notion of dualism.

Really the whole secret to the tree of life is that adam and eve in the garden who experienced true bliss and plenty was Brahman (the bliss and plenty being sat-chit-ananda, adam and eve being shiva and shakti), and the "eating of the apple" was the moment of Maya (the snake) playing a trick of forgetfulness on the jiva to forget who he really was (unalloyed unity, ie. Brahman). And thus being "cast out" of the garden into the samsaric cycles of birth and death until they remember again.

I understand that I am giving a non-Abrahamic reading to this, but I think all true readings of gnosis always lead back to the soul actually being sat-chit-ananda in a state of seeming ignorance and delusion -- but only *seeming*, because we are never not that. The secret reading of the tree of life and adam's and eve's shame over seeing their naked bodies is actually telling you that "you are not the body". The apple isn't showing them the horrible truth of their lot, it's showing you a lie, a false superimposed reality to make you forget that you are Reality with a capital 'R'.

Did the other anon delete his post because it was too similar to frater’s?

>>17484796
wrong
https://brandnewtube.com/watch/do-not-eat-the-babies_QPojXPuTIcRfsMe.html

>>17487066

Just checked the archive and saw your deleted post. Eh, that’s really not that different from what I said, I do believe we should interpret texts from within themselves first before applying outsider lenses and interpretations to further sharpen the view. Fundamentally though the duality/maya and Nonduality/Brahman division you’re speaking of is no different to what I explained anon. I’m also no stranger to Hinduism nor tantra, I know I’m a bit of a shill so apologies if I’ve posted this to you before, but if you are interested, here’s an essay I wrote breaking down and explaining the entire Tattva ontology of tantra, specifically the tantraloka of abhinavagupta, along with comparisons/relations to parts of Kabbalah, Husserlian phenomenology, Aristotle and so forth.

https://pastebin.com/AjzfzFTk

>>17485687
Would this make your philosophy a sort of Dialectical Monism? I've talked to you before as you spoken of praise for Urizen. I have the exact same perspective if that is the case. Although I use examples such as Heraclitus and Taoism as my example of achieving Harmony for myself.

>>17484820
Why are you like this?

>>17484820
Western philosophy began by questioning authority (namely, one's own epistemic authority, by questioning one's conditions of knowledge and experience.)

If you aren't a zealot for the value of human inquiry, you are absolutely faithless to the most foundational of traditional Western values.

>>17485178
couldnt the fall and evil be symbolized following the jewish simple response to evil as making the good in creation and by creatures truly good? see: god creates through a withdrawal, a constriciton, void of his infinite light, that would be darkness and ''''evil'''' (evil here in its original sense of being a mere veil - interestingly an anagram of evil - a necessary ''lowering'' of God himself not to consume all creation with his unsurpassable infinity) and donates his light in a precise harmonical measure that penetrates this darkness. and so in the fall humanity has the opportunity to partake of this same sacrificial love and divine goodness that in our own void, nothingness we infuse it with the light of God and praise Him, be good toward His creation and creatures. Thus there's real good (because it is a willing act of good), and real Love.

>>17484872
I disagree, partly. Simply because the dragon/snake convinced Eve, saying that she would be like God if she ate the fruit of the tree. This is hubris, pure and simple. In substance it is no different than how Satan himself chose separation from God.

Ultimately it is a false form of knowledge, filled with Satanic deception and that is certainly true as you've said.

>>17484796
Human consciousness is the only thing that allows us the opportunity to conquer sin. The natural world of low-consciousness beasts and non-conscious lesser beings is pure sin.

>>17488931
I in other posts in the thread go into various interpretations of the fall as ultimately Good, but personally my conception of actual ontological Evil is too significantly different and rooted in the nature of Sin.

>>17489435
I don’t disagree but this isn’t separate to what I’ve said. What is a god, an EL? If we look into the Hebrew and into the traditional interpretations, it is anyone with might, power, abundance, it is a hero, a judge, a rich man, this is why God is called EL Elyon and also Elohim, as he is the most high.

The desire for decadence, abundance, hierarchical exceptions and so forth, that IS Pride. Let us consider Lucifer.

Numbers 22:22 is the first use of the term satan.

"And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an ADVERSARY against him. Now he was riding upon his ass, and his two servants were with him."

The word Adversary here is lamed shin teth nun, Satan is spelt shin teth nun.

Here YHVH/Jehovah is called Satan.

So in this case, THE "Malak Has-YHVH" stood in the path of Balaam as a "satan" - as the behest of YHVH to tell him to turn back from the orders of his employer.

This term is not a name of a god or an advesary of God, it is a word for someone who keeps you from going down a path - it simply means resistance, opposition, obstacle, advesary - and what ever you call this - you could just as easily call another name. Just as if you are trying to lose weight, pizza may well be your stumbling block, or "satan."

Therefore, a modern word for it is "weakness." As in Kal-el often succombs to his satan, a stone called Kryptonite.

This is why he is portrayed as an exploiter of man's own dark desires and tempting him to stumble from grace.

Now Lucifer/phosphorus.

In 2 Peter 1:19 Jesus is called Phosphorus (in greek) which translates to Lucifer in latin.

The reason for this?

Jerome placed the term lucifer in the vulgate bible, Origen was the first to define it in terms of Christianity.

Before Origen Lucifer was just another word. But let's see how Origen defines Lucifer?

Cont

>>17485638
Where's a good place to start with Böhme? The Aurora?

>>17489502
In Origen's works, he establishes the idea of Lucifer, which is a term we can only attribute to his authorship as there is no reference of it before him, nor was any other origin cited for the term, but often his name is invoke in magical classics in reference to Lucifer. He likens Lucifer to one who dwells just below God, but seeks only to have all else below him.. How can you approach that which only exists by its existence to be separate and superior to you? Once you DO gain equal ground with it, it is no longer Lucifer - it is seen in a different light and in a different scale. It can therefore be seen then as the unwillingness of the Yod in YHVH to descend into its creation; thus the Lucifer is but the arrogance of the unity toward the multiplicity. IT IS AN ILLUSIONARY ATTITUDE. This is why Lucifer, in apocatastasis, is the last thing to be taken back into the unity... and his hell is that loss of separation from all else. This is why Vanity is his greatest sin, alikata, or the need to be regarded separately for qualities you can only see in yourself. He needs to be separate, not integrated.


This is the very same impulse that goes towards wanting exception in experience, division, duality, to be higher than another is to have a dualistic division inherently and this can only be gained in power, in authority if there is one below and one above.

consider this to the contrast of the harmonious hierarchy of Heaven.

1 Corinthians 15:39-43

39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in

Galatians 3:28

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

And a final verse

Song of Solomon 1:2
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth-- for your love is more delightful than wine

Thus, we are told in heaven there is still distinction and not confusions of Persons, but through the unification of Love they are one, married and undividable as the members of the parts of the body of Christ, just as the eye is not divided against the hand, but the eye is not confused with the hand so is it with the men of god and with Christ himself who is the head.

And why do I bring up this kiss, a kiss signifies Peace, thus this is the peace between God and man, and the verse says “of his mouth” which is to say, the harmony of Christ as both incarnate man and fully God,

Cont

>>17489547
if not he would not be able to kiss with the Kiss of his mouth, thus this also symbolically this is the harmony of God’s nature with the flesh of his own and the harmony of this with us also. And are we not told that those who become married become one flesh?

Genesis 2:24

For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

Thus man is become one in flesh with the flesh of Christ which is one with his divinity in the same way as bride and bridegroom become one.

Thus we see the dichotomy of the sinful nature which strives for exception and division because of pride, and the humble peace of Christ and the submission and unity of Love.

A final note, I would consider Michael the better equal opposite to Satan, as Satan is naught but pride and Michael’s name is “who is like god?” Which is also his challenge, proclaiming that none is like God in ultimate humbleness, thus we are told this dragon of pride is cast down by the angel of humbleness and so we are told his head shall be crushed by this same humbleness.

>>17489526
Nah, begin with Clavis. Here’s a reading order for boehme.

Clavis, Threefold Life, The Aurora, Questions Concerning the Soul, Theosophical Theses, Mysterium Magnum

Also check out Hegel’s introduction to boehme’s philosophy in his lectures

>>17489585
Thanks for the recs and for the other great stuff ITT.

ALLEGORY OF EVE AND THE SERPENT.--The primordial elericity or Solar Force, semi-latent within the aura of every human being, was known to the Greeks as the Speirêma, the serpent-coil; and in the Upanishads, the sacred writings of India, it is said to lie coiled up like a slumbering serpent. In the third chapter of the Book of Genesis it is symbolised as the serpent, "more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made." Eve, when this force stirred within her, was tempted to its misapplication. Directed downward through the lower physical centres for generation, unhallowed by a consciousness of responsibility to God and the incoming soul, the Serpent Force or Fire brought knowledge of evil; directed upward toward the brain for regeneration, the formation of the deathless Solar Body, it brought knowledge of good. Hence the dual operation of the Solar Force is symbolised as the tree of the knowlege of good and evil.

The curse of the Lord upon the serpent, "upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:" makes reference to the fact that, during a certain period of human evolution, man shall remain in ignorance of the Law governing the serpent (Solar Force) which shall manifest in man's lower or earthly vehicles misgoverned by the human mind.

"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, p. 128 and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." During the above mentioned cycle of evolution, in his ignorance of the Law governing the Serpent Fire, man shall continually direct it downward or bruise its head, while the Serpent Fire, thus misdirected, shall bruise man's heel, heel being a euphemism for that part of man nearest the earth, that is to say, the body, lower emotions and mortal mind.

>>17484796
It was actually unbelief.

>>17490260
"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, p. 128 and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." During the above mentioned cycle of evolution, in his ignorance of the Law governing the Serpent Fire, man shall continually direct it downward or bruise its head, while the Serpent Fire, thus misdirected, shall bruise man's heel, heel being a euphemism for that part of man nearest the earth, that is to say, the body, lower emotions and mortal mind.

"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 for ever: "Here the tree of life symbolises the upward play of the Solar Force for the creation of the deathless or Solar body. Hence the meaning is lest man should learn the Law governing Solar Force and, directing it upward, become immortal.

"So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." Various interpretations of this passage . are possible. Cosmically speaking, the garden of Eden symbolises those realms -of higher spiritual attainment, at the gates of which, from the time of man's descent into the lower cycles of evolution, God placed Heavenly Beings charged with the duty of preventing that nature in man correspondent to their own from receiving stimulation during man's progress through p. 130 the lower spheres of knowledge. The Muhammedans rightly hold that man can only be born again in Spirit through the aid of Heavenly Powers typified by the Angel Gabriel, † who is said by them to connect the heart of man with the soul, the lower consciousness with the higher. Then the same,force in Nature which has deterred man from premature spiritual attainment assists him in his upward evolution, the mind having been prepared through man's own effort for a further understanding of God's Mysteries.
https://sacred-texts.com/eso/cdg/cdg08.htm

>>17486220
>As all children do when they learn to never question their until they’re ready to move pit of their house. I suppose you can graphed on the rest once exposed to the Epic of Gilgamesh

>>17484820
based tranny btfo'ing op. christfags on suicide watch. The non christians are just npc's and thier "butterfly bad". You are right in this one. It's pretty fucking obvious.
>>17484796
no it was not. it was disobbeing the rules evne when they are retarded
>>17484854
cope

>>17484796
It was knowledge / science, which I suppose you could call consciousness.

>>17484820
Partially right. It's definitely a children's morality play for establishing obedience, but specifically for obeying a movement that denied knowledge / science. It wasn't completely against questioning authority because it was designed to breed questioning of Roman authority.

>>17485178
>This is the benefit of the fall and coming of Christ; instead Of man just being a creation who has the image of god(agreed upon by all traditional Christian and Jewish commentaries to be reason) we also have marriage and Nonduality within the unity of God. Thus we are divided for love’s sake and reunited for Love. Love of God for man and Love of man for God, Love is the entirety of the Christian doctrine. Love producing creation by love and through love, creating man for and by love, and then redeeming man through this same love by love itself (Christ) being born, who gives the ultimate commandment of Love, and upon the day of heavenly Zion upon earth, eternal love shall be entirety manifest within time.

Why wouldn't this be implicitly so, had it been about "love"?

>>17484796
It was pride, to become like the Lord.

>>17484796
Consciousness wasn't it, without consciousness they wouldn't have been persuaded to eat the apple.

>>17484872
>The tree of the experience of extremes, of imbalance, of duality, in truth the thing that the tree Gave was the experience of total and utter poverty and of the experience of Decadent over-abundance.

So... sexual intercourse.

>>17484796
According to Ireneaus Adam and Eve tried to put themselves on the same level as God by eating the fruit, and when Christ was tested in the desert he succeeded where they failed by being resigned under God. Maybe I'm misremembering.

>>17489547
>It can therefore be seen then as the unwillingness of the Yod in YHVH to descend into its creation
What does this mean

>>17484820
Fake Butterfly

>>17484796
You're all fucking retarded. The original sin was thinking we're sinful and we deserve to be punished for it.

>>17493870
lmao ok monkey go back to touching your dick. you have no prefrontal cortex. imagine not intuiting that sin is a perfect metaphor for time preference and impulsivity which are animal traits

>>17493875
Imagine being so naturally impulsive that exercising self-awareness is something that innately feels like punishment.

>>17488889
Right. Which is why this Middle Eastern death cult has always been a poor fit.

>>17490336
Terrible typos, I know.

>>17493901
it's not about you or me, we are dealing with populations. dis nibba really missing the point

>>17484820

Butterfly dude, you are usually OK but this is a legit retard take.

>>17494052
holy brainlet, terrible typos are the least of your problems considering the fact that the threshold of"children leaving the house" is in no way related to the metaphor in the text we are discussing here, the threshold where humans are tempted into developing a society through newly found knowledge which conflicts with their animalstic instincts (original sin) which leads to rampant self destructive patterns of behavior that can destroy individuals and communities

seriously do you even have two brain cells to rub together or are women actually this intellectually stunted generally?

>>17493875
>go back to touching your dick
Go back to stroking your "virtue"

>>17485837
>making a good post against a tripfag tranny
Why do you waste your time like this?

>>17484796
Nah bros. It's a tree. It symbolizes arborescence, logical thought and order/rationality. To eat from the treez is to to logically inquire into Edens existence, to demand control and ownership via ones reason over the vastness and immanent perfection of life and therefore deconstruct garden Eden into pure nothingness as one is always seeking for the unattainable absolute. The apple is Lacan's object petit A, the object of desire, that makes you seek for an always fleeting sense of transcendence. Eating from the tree is the beginning of subjectivity, the beginning of the human. Its that simple.

>>17484796
What if tree, mean tree?

>>17485594
>For love is a distinguishing of two, who nevertheless are absolutely not distinguished for each other.
what the fuck does that mean?

Yeah christcucks are the ultimate unconscious NPCs

>>17484796
I see, you have read Kleist. If you haven't, read "On the marionette theatre" and "The earthquake in Chile". They are precisely about this topic.

>>17494052
Yet Nazis were anti-christian and they were among the most authoritarian people in western history.

>>17484820
This is why the bible doesn’t permit women to teach men.

>>17484796
what makes you think 'we' are conscious?

>>17496655
Bro. It's pretty simple.
Fire and Water distinguish themselves from each other. This contrast is a relation only they share. So fire and water, by virtue of being opposites, that mutually explain each other, are reliant on each other. They are united, because they in conflict. It's called Dialectical Monism. And love functions in the same way, where you differenciate yourself from your partner, and she from you, which unites you two as a couple of opposites.

>>17497109
The SS bussed kids to church on Sunday’s kiddo

>>17497167
Literal sole thing we can be sure of: that we experience things. If we deny that, there's no basis to assert anything at all is true.

>>17498127
You know AI can currently have subjective experiance

>>17484796
literally hang yourself fucking idiot

>>17484971
So the snake is symbolic of the wave function, which is itself symbolic of dualism, which is the quintessential fracturing of a unified whole. The whole state was disrupted by consumption of the fruit and became a toroidal nigger-entity with no functioning interface to unity.

>>17484820
woman moment

>>17484796
>>>/x/
Sin, like magic, is not real.

>>17484971
So... the serpent is Slaanesh?

>>17491351
From the Omni-temporal viewpoint of God, creation, time and his love is already complete as he dwells in eternity, this nature of love was also the case in Eden until the fall and beginning of Sin. Sin is a massive topic so i won’t elaborate fully, if asked I’ll go a bit into it. However it is firmly my belief that ontological and phenomenological analysis can demonstrate this. Again if asked I will post such an analysis.

>>17493285
No, you’re making it over specific and particular. The other anons are closer to Correct.

>>17493704
Apologies, was speaking with kabbalistic/Agrippan language. It is the misunderstanding of creation, of perceiving the highest and most divine part of Godhead as a tyrant, as a evil monarch, this is how the misconception of Satan is a marriage of rebellion with pride. “Why is he dominating me and I cannot dominate?”

>>17498720
Kinda, too sexual of fixation in this, this anon interprets it correctly >>17498441

>>17498441
To Chuck, or to Sneed, that is the question.

>>17496655
It is when you eidetically, emotionally, intellectually, on a structural level, as equal or identical to your own subjective identity and self, or as more essential to this. It is the highest level of Care in the heideggerian sense possible, Love is seeing the other and saying “this is not other, this is essential to my self, it is I” but even deeper than our own I, as again, you can identify more with your children for example than yourself.

>He still hasn't read The Hypostasis of the Archons

>>17484796
Correct. Earth is Eden, and when hominids lacked consciousness, they were nothing more than mere animals, thus they were in tune with the perfection of God's creation, and harmony existed throughout the garden. Eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was the mysterious blossoming of sapience in humans. It was when they began to stray from God's order and make decisions for themselves, judging what was right and wrong in a world where such concepts did not exist before, and as such, suffering and sin followed.

>>17484796
This

We had nous then the apple gave us logos

>>17484872
Love you man. I really need to read the Bible. God bless you and thank you for all the information in this thread.