Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Adam the original Gabra
Great discussion, I love this topic. BTW, in bone grafts, surgeons will typically use a rib as it is well known that it will regenerate itself. I always like to point out how just as Eve was taken from Adam's side in his sleep to be his wife, the bride of Christ was taken from his side when he was pierced shedding his blood (and water) as he also "slept" (was dead). The blood of the sacrifices also flowed out the side of the temple washed out with the waters of the Gihon spring.

This topic goes right to the heart of the mysteries of marriage, the passion, the holy of holies, the nature of Elohim, the union of opposites.. it's kinda a big deal. It's so all-encompassing I imagine we will spend eternity exploring it with Yeshua himself as our guide no doubt, first in the kingdom when He as Melchizedek teaches in the new temple, then forever after in the new heavens and earth.

There's lots to say, and we may disagree - and that's fine, but I thought rather than reinvent the wheel I would copy a snippet from a post I made on a book review that touches on this subject in a wider context. To get the full background you might have to read the book description and then the review I'm replying to. The book itself seems to rely on the biblical ignorance of the reader and strawman arguments, but nevermind that.

So, if you're bored:

"The authors in this publication -- judging from this review -- seem to perpetuate and set a modern example of the same problem the biblical authors continually encountered because the text of the bible was not considered important anymore or being re-interpreted to fit the sociopolitical climate of the day (as today). This condition sets the whole backdrop to the book of Jeremiah for instance (whether or not it's believed to be 'inspired' is not the issue) and addresses how even then, those who were thought of as the biblical experts and scholars of the day were undermining the text with their 'propaganda' (same word the reviewer used to describe the opposite): "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law [torah] of the LORD [YHWH] is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie." -- Jeremiah 8.8

When it is said "The social contexts of religious belief and expression play a large role in these analyses," this could equally apply to the authors themselves making the analyses as they are not isolated from these influences -- particularly the Atheist-Socialistic political influences -- if not steeped in it more-so in the universities.

As an example of how similarities can exist between religions of opposite intent, we may explore the idea of God having a consort. The biblical authors do not hide the concept of God having a Mrs, despite what 99.9% of "Christians" might say. This fact is plainly shown in Proverbs 8 and She is referred to as Wisdom (Heb. "Chokmah," better known in Greek as "Sophia"). It kinda makes plain sense though if there is a God-the-Father who begets a Son, don't you think? If, biblically-speaking, Man is made in the image and likeness of God ("Elohim," plural noun) and originally Woman was included with Man, shouldn't that logically reflect the nature of Elohim on some level? "In the day when God [Elohim] created man [adam], He made him in the likeness of God [Elohim]. He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man [Adam] in the day when they were created." --Gen 5.1-2. They, including the Woman, were included in the name "Adam" as when traditionally a wife takes the family name of the husband in marriage and they have one name, as does Elohim, it's a corporate body, a singularity of plural members. Like Paul said: "The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free-- and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Now the body is not made up of one part but of many." --1Cor 12.12-14.

This is one of the deeper understandings of what the "Shema" means in Hebrew understanding. All this is typically ignored by those brilliant biblical scholars of today in their world-class analyses. In traditional Jewish understanding, the two cherubim facing each other -- made of one piece with the mercy seat in the holy of holies between which God's glory resided on earth -- are said to be, wait for it, male and female. In all of this is the divine mystery of marriage, the union of opposites, husband and wife, from which the fruit of life emerges. Only now, as in Jeremiah's day, the faithful bride has been perverted into a temple harlot, ie, the Whore of Babylon, because the faithful have strayed from the words of her husband and committed adultery serving other gods/idols/etc as they did not discriminate between the holy and profane just as some of the authors of this publication make a point to do. It's no accident that the various cults the apostate were seduced into from surrounding nations were heavily into sex/fertility/orgies (adultery) and sacrificed the babies from this practice (abortion) to gods and how this language and imagery is reflected in the harlotry that take place on a spiritual level. Book of Jeremiah has many examples. "Then the LORD said to me in the days of Josiah the king, Have you seen what faithless Israel did? She went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and she was a harlot there." --Jeremiah 3.6

Another example of similarities between holy and profane can be seen in studying the use and misuse of the zodiac in different systems of worship.

"Of considerable significance is the book's opposition to the presumption of a division between "official" religion of the biblical authors, and the "popular" religion of the apostate factions. This distinction is shown to be artificial and derived from an uncritical acceptance of the value judgments of the biblical authors."

This is rhetorically nice but to continue the double-speak -- meaningfully senseless.

If the God worshiped by the biblical authors is the same as the apostates' whom they are trying to lead back on the right path, then why all the fuss (cf Jeremiah)? Why is nearly the whole bible and its history of Israel concerned with separating the holy from the profane if there is really no difference? Why bother? This is like saying my whole post thus far is not really in opposition to the authors' presumption of there being no difference in this area just mentioned, as one might think, but rather this distinction is false and derived from an uncritical acceptance of the value judgements of myself. What?!? It sounds to me like you're saying (some of) the authors of 'Religious Diversity' are saying the biblical authors are not saying what they are saying and we should listen to them (the authors of 'Religious Diversity') who give very little credibility to what the biblical authors are saying, some 2600 years after the fact, to tell us what the biblical authors are saying. Maybe you're not, but it sounds that way.

Despite the unfortunate slant the authors seem to approach this important area of research with, I would still be interested in obtaining a copy someday, as I always like to get views from all sides to see which makes the most sense and answers the most questions."
"All that openeth the matrix is mine" -Exodus 34.19a

Messages In This Thread
Adam the original Gabra - by gregoryfl - 01-16-2015, 06:18 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by Stephen Silver - 01-16-2015, 08:25 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by gregoryfl - 01-16-2015, 08:55 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by Stephen Silver - 01-16-2015, 10:50 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by gregoryfl - 01-16-2015, 11:20 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by Stephen Silver - 01-16-2015, 11:42 PM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by gregoryfl - 01-17-2015, 12:19 AM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by Stephen Silver - 01-17-2015, 01:59 AM
Re: Adam the original Gabra - by aux - 01-18-2015, 07:47 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)