Patsy (Songstress), asked me some questions about Genesis on another forum and it made me realise how difficult it is to read the Bible when we try reading it literally or historically, rather than spiritually.
Back in 2002 I wrote a HUGE forum about Genesis – it took over three weeks of daily writing and covered 3 HP pages (over 100 A4 pages !!). Now, I don’t intend to inflict that on anyone again (I was so impressed with all those, like Paul and Gillyann who stayed with me all the way through originally!) but felt a potted version might be helpful. I have severely edited this and left many "Days" out, but hope you will still get the general gist!
In Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, Mary Baker Eddy devotes a whole chapter to Genesis, taking every verse in Chapter 1 and then most up to the Cain and Abel story in Genesis 4.
If you would like to, you can read the whole chapter from on
Before we begin, I will put any quotes from Genesis 1 in purple, the Adam and Eve allegory in red and the writings of Mary Baker Eddy in blue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 1
At the beginning of the Bible is a little chapter that has been largely overlooked and ignored. It only has 31 verses and it is so easy to read it, take the words literally and then dismiss it. I am talking about Genesis 1 – you remember, where God made the world in seven days?
Most people assume that the Bible starts with the allegory of Adam and Eve. It doesn’t. The first chapter (and first three verses of the second) was written by a different author from the rest of the book of Genesis. Whoever compiled it all those thousands of years ago decided to leave the two accounts of creation in there, side by side. The second one is completely opposite and contradicts the first. The first one has much spiritual truth and power. The second is a dream. From my personal observation, I would say that Chapter 1 is divine revelation while chapter 2 is human opinion. The first one holds the secret of what God is, what life is, what man is and our relation to HimHer and from this understanding comes immense power that can be expressed through metaphysical healing. It’s worth giving it all a deeper study!
The Bible is on three levels – the moral, the historical and the spiritual. There is the inspired Word – divine revelation, there is also human opinion and there’s also human opinion writing down what they think God’s word is – we have to decide for ourselves what is true and what is not, according to how we have come to understand the Light.
Reading the Bible literally does not work, as it is full of contradictions, so how do you know what is true and what isn’t? We need to remember that it was written by a variety of men of differing levels of spiritual understanding and inspiration. There are also mistakes and mistranslations and where an inspired teacher was dictating, perhaps his not-so-inspired scribe wrote it down wrong! Many people would find what I am saying blasphemous, but that’s just how I understand it.
I decide for myself what is true by what works for me – if I get healing and protection, guidance and supply, peace and joy from a story or a verse, then I consider it to be true because I have PROVED it in my experience. I don’t accept anything just because someone says it’s in the Bible (or Koran or whatever) therefore it must be true. It’s all too easy for religious leaders to threaten with eternal damnation or promise eternal heaven, (or 72 virgins to greet you etc) when they’re not going to be around when you find out for yourself!! What a con!!
The Scriptures are very sacred. Our aim must be to have them understood spiritually, for only by this understanding can truth be gained……
It is this spiritual perception of Scripture,
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Interesting, Judy.
I recall now that, yes, it is true and certainly not your or CS's opinion that the opening of Genesis has two books stuck onto each other, written out again as though they were one manuscript. This is accepted academic fact.
I'd say that parts of the Bible are written on more than three levels actually. For example, not that I myself can elucidate, but much of the OT can also be read in terms of kabbalistic symbology, kabbalah being the inner or esoteric teaching of the Jews. Then there's a fifth level at least: in the 1970s a fascinating book titled "The Quantum Gods" came out by an author whose name I don't recall. He demonstrated that the "seven days" of Creation in Genesis are also a key teaching on how, through thought, feeling, and the spoken word or fiat, human beings can also command matter as it were, and "precipitate" things, causing events to take place by consciousness.
So the opening of Genesis is also a manual on white magic, or how human beings can be co-creators with God. You just have to read the inner meaning within each of the seven days, understand what is really being said, and then apply those seven "days" (which are really stages) in order to bring things to pass.
Venetian
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Venetian,
Thanks for your comments, and especially for reminding us about the other stages! There are also of course puzzles like this one:
Subject : Centre of the Bible
This is pretty strange or odd how it worked out this way.
Even if you are not religious, you should read this.
What is the shortest chapter in the Bible? Psalm 117
What is the longest chapter in the Bible? Psalm 119
Which chapter is in the centre of the Bible? Answer Psalm 118
Fact: there are 594 chapters before Psalm 118
Fact: there are 594 chapters after Psalm 118
Add these numbers together and you get 1188.
Does Psalm 118 v.8 say anything significant about God's perfect will for our lives?
The next time someone says they would like to find God's perfect will for their lives and that they want to be in the centre of His will, just send them to the centre of His Word!
Psalm 118 v.8 (NKJV) "It is better to trust in the LORD than put confidence in Man"
It saddens me when people just dismiss the Bible (or any other sacred text) as simply a fairy story and not of any relevance to today's world and its problems.
Love and peace,
Judy
PS This is just my little jokey numbers thing, but I like to remind myself of it sometimes:
Question: What is God's telephone number?
Answer: Isaiah 6524 😉
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Dear Judy
This quote smacks of seperation and the Vatican's wish to stand between us and GOD.
Psalm 118 v.8 (NKJV) "It is better to trust in the LORD than put confidence in Man"
We are one, we are all part of GOD there is no seperation unless we perceive it to be so IMHO.
being love
kim xx
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hey Kim,
The Vatican didn't write the Psalms!! 😉 (Or are you saying that they deliberately compiled the Bible so that verse would be in the middle. Hard to engineer I would have thought as it was all translating what was already there.
Most people do see separation between God and his idea, man - that's what the Adam and Eve allegory is all about! Most people do trust in man, or at least in material things and remedies rather than God, so yes, that is separation, isn't it? Very few people turn to God in total trust and expectation of good except as a last resort and then see Him as some sort of Band-aid, which is not what it's all about! Surely the Psalmist here is turning us gently away from our reliance on matter and back to one-ness?
Love and peace,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Genesis 2:6:
But.......
To recap: All is good. All is perfect. The universe is spiritual, made of light, reflection and spiritual ideas and their identities, the highest being the "sons and daughters of God." Man, made in the image and likeness of God has been blessed. God looked upon His creation and noted that it was "very good". All is finished, not needing any cultivation or improvement. All is complete.
BUT..........
How often do we find ourselves not accepting the good that is at hand and saying "I know such and such is wonderful BUT......!" or "I’m grateful for this BUT....." How often do we destroy the positive with that horrible little negative word?
So here is the beginning of the BUT - the denial of the truth in the first chapter of Genesis - its very counterfeit.
So how was that BUT brought into being?
Genesis 2:6:
But there went up a mist from the earth, .....
MIST: Anything that dims, darkens, intercepts or obscures vision. Webster.
Genesis 2:6:
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
So here, in the BUT, after the perfect vision has been obscured, the earth is considered barren and dry - it needs rain before the plants can grow. Lack and incompleteness are creeping into the story.......
Do you remember what the production of the idea of vegetation was like in the first chapter?
Genesis 1:11 & 12:
And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 9
Genesis 2:7
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Compare that with:
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
The following translation is from the Icelandic:--
And God said, Let us make man after our mind and our likeness; and God shaped man after His mind; after God's mind shaped He him; and He shaped them male and female.(S&H 525)
Have you noticed the first difference here? God is now the Lord God.
LORD GOD. Jehovah.
This double term is not used in the first chapter of Genesis, the record of spiritual creation. It is introduced in the second and following chapters, when the spiritual sense of God and of infinity is disappearing from the recorder's thought,--when the true scientific statements of the Scriptures become clouded through a physical sense of God as finite and corporeal. From this follow idolatry and mythology,--belief in many gods, or material intelligences, as the opposite of the one Spirit, or intelligence, named Elohim, or God. (Science and Health 591)
Is Spirit, God, injected into dust, and eventually ejected at the demand of matter? Does Spirit enter dust, and lose therein the divine nature and omnipotence? Does Mind, God, enter matter to become there a mortal sinner, animated by the breath of God?(S&H 524)
There’s a little poem that I can’t remember the words of, just these two lines – you’ll be seeing them often!
"Tell me which man you believe is you.
Genesis 1 or Genesis 2?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 10
Genesis 2: 8
And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Here the sense of separation is introduced. The one-ness of God and HisHer reflection, of the divine Mind and its idea is now denied. Man is no longer one with God, Spirit, he is PUT somewhere else!
[col
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Quoting you Judy:
">>Many people say (and I’ve certainly read it often on HP) "You have to have evil in order to know good" or "You have to have both positivity AND negativity." "
Yes, one often come across that. An old and deep error IMO. There is no "need" to know evil. You have to know evil only in order to know and to have evil IMO. It goes along with the idea that good and evil are equal opposites in the universe, which is irrational IMO. For these are moral qualities, and of course there can be far, far more of Love than of hatred, for example.
Regarding the one God, not the plural God, I don't read Hebrew, the original language of Genesis - or perhaps NOT the original, but the one in which our civilisation received it. However, I believe I have read and been told that "Elohim" in literal translation means "the divine us" i.e. that IT is a plural term for plural Gods. More to the point, I believe I have read and been told that in the English (e.g. King James) Bibles, it is the term "LORD God" that is the translation - a very poor one - into English, of "Elohim". That is, that every time in the Hebrew it is written "Elohim" or "the divine us", in our English Bible we have it as "LORD God".
Venetian
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Der Judy
IMHO the bible was tampered with throughout in the beginning and afterwards, translations were also carried out from a particular male perspective and the retranslation of the Lords Prayer is a perfect example of how far off the actual bible is, my dream would be for it to be completely retranslated again.
We have discussed this before and agreed to disagree if my memory serves me well. I prefer to stick with the pure untampered texts that were discovered in the last century.
The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary, the Essene Gospels, the Dead Sea Scrolls etc
Dear Venetian
Interesting, yes I agree.
being love
kim xx
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Venetian – I love you !! [sm=1kis.gif][sm=ladys-man.gif][sm=1kis.gif][sm=ladys-man.gif][sm=1kis.gif][sm=ladys-man.gif][sm=1kis.gif]
Do you know, you are the FIRST person ever to have said on HP we don’t need to know evil in order to know good, sadness in order to know joy etc.
Oh wow – you’ve made me so happy!! [sm=jump1.gif][sm=jump2.gif][sm=1syellow1.gif][sm=jump1.gif][sm=jump2.gif][sm=1syellow1.gif][sm=jump1.gif][sm=jump2.gif][sm=1syellow1.gif][sm=jump1.gif][sm=jump2.gif][sm=1syellow1.gif]
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU !!!
As to Elohim. I’m writing this at home, not in the Reading Room where I have all the Bible references and dictionaries etc. This is Mary Baker Eddy in the chapter on Genesis (as she says, it was what scholars understood then – 1875) If it’s any different – I’ll let you know.
It may be worth while here to remark that, according to the best scholars, there are clear evidences of two distinct documents in the early part of the book of Genesis. One is called the Elohistic, because the Supreme Being is therein called Elohim. The other document is called the Jehovistic, because Deity therein is always called Jehovah,--or Lord God, as our common version translates it.
Throughout the first chapter of Genesis and in three verses of the second,--in what we understand to be the spiritually scientific account of creation,--it is Elohim (God) who creates. From the fourth verse of chapter two to chapter five, the creator is called Jehovah, or the Lord. The different accounts become more and more closely intertwined to the end of chapter twelve, after which the distinction is not definitely traceable. In the historic parts of the Old Testament, it is usually Jehovah, peculiarly the divine sovereign of the Hebrew people, who is referred to.
The idolatry which followed this material mythology is seen in the Phoenician worship of Baal, in the Moabitish god Chemosh, in the Moloch of the Amorites, in the Hindoo Vishnu, in the Greek Aphrodite, and in a thousand other so-called deities.
It was also found among the Israelites, who constantly went after "strange gods." They called the Supreme Being by the national name of Jehovah. In that name of Jehovah, the true idea of God seems almost lost. God becomes "a man of war," a tribal god to be worshipped, rather than Love, the divine Principle to be lived and loved. (Science and Health 523)
The eternal Elohim includes the forever universe. The name Elohim is in the plural, but this plurality of Spirit does not imply more than one God, nor does it imply three persons in one. It relates to the oneness, the tri-unity of Life, Truth, and Love. "Let them have dominion."(S&H 515)
Love and peace,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Dear Judy
I knew with all this Ascension I have become invisible at times and to certain people Judy but I have been saying this to you since HP began in 2000 perhaps you just did not register it or see it ! I am sure Brother Bob, Vortex and others have also said it over the years.
"we don’t need to know evil in order to know good, sadness in order to know joy etc"
In fact in my domain it does not exist at all!
beinglove
Kim xx
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Kim,
Yes, I am very aware of some people, including you, saying evil doesn't exist at all - not only in reality, in the absolute, but also in the relative - in this present human experience, but that is oceans apart from my understanding.
We cannot ignore evil - it needs to be uncovered and healed, by understanding its unreality and powerlessness.
Apologies if I have misunderstood you. I just went back to an old forum where you talk about negative and positive energy (copied below). When people put forward this view that you have to have evil in order to appreciate good etc, they are always quoting the need to have the balance of negative and positive.
On the 27th Dec 2001 on my forum "Destroying darkness with light" you wrote this:
I do not use the word 'evil' for everything in the universe comes from the source of God. I see polarity and duality in negative and positive energy and dream that we will come into oneness and total alignment with the source so that negative energy will grace our planet no more with its anti-love.
Only good comes from God. Negative energy in my book stands for evil. That sounded to me Kim, like you believed that "negative energy" comes from God, if "everything" comes from Him. That would make it legitimate and necessary. That's obviously what I misunderstood.
People misundertand me all the time Kim because they don't actually read what I write, but what they assume I write (tarring me with the whole baggage of 'religion") and I guess that this is what I must have done to you. My apologies.
Love and peace,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Day 12
Genesis 2: 18, 20
And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Uh Oh! Here’s where all the problems start! In Second Genesis man is ALONE. He is incomplete. Not only is he separated from God, but there he is having to work in the garden (the spiritual man in Genesis 1 doesn’t have to till the soil – he/she just goes out and multiplies and replenishes the earth, effortlessly) and he also needs a helper suited to him (the meaning of that curious word "meet") Today we would say he needs a mate, a companion, a partner, a spouse, an other "half".
Loneliness is the cause of so much suffering and unhappiness. Most human relationship problems arise out of loneliness. We all know too that you can be just as lonely in a relationship as when you’re on your own.
It is loneliness and the misunderstanding of what real love is that is the root cause of all the sexual perversions – of child abuse, paedophilia, pornography, rape, etc etc They are simply the counterfeit of the true and pure love which is the expression of our real selfhood.)
So, how does this compare to our spiritual identity in Genesis One?
Genesis 1: 26 & 27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Man is spiritual, whole and complete, the reflection of God, composed of the womanhood and manhood qualities. He/she has God-given authority and dominion.
"Tell me which man you believe is you.
Genesis 1 or Genesis 2?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 13
Genesis 2: 21
And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
The history of error is a dream-narrative. The dream has no reality, no intelligence, no mind; therefore the dreamer and dream are one, for neither is true nor real. (S&H 530)
One definition for sleep is diluted death! Sleep can also be described as apathy, listlessness, boredom, laziness. Adam was put into a "deep sleep" – and it doesn’t say anywhere that he woke up, so perhaps it was just all a dream and we’ve been fooled all these thousands of years by a dream! While I joke, - this account is of course simply an allegory – I see it as an attempt by the author to explain the origin of suffering and evil in the world.
So, after all was created spiritual, perfect, complete and very good in Chapter 1, we’ve now had the first account of knowledge of evil; the first account of loneliness and now we have sleep – or hypnotism and we have an account of the first medical operation.
Genesis 2: 22
And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Now we have the separation of male from female. Adam loses a rib and feels incomplete and looks for his completion outside of himself. Eve feels subservient – she feels she’s a second-class citizen because she was created after man and from him.
Genesis 2: 23
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
EVE. A beginning; mortality; that which does not last forever; a finite belief concerning life, substance, and intelligence in matter; error; the belief that the human race originated materially instead of spiritually,--that man started first from dust, second from a rib, and third from an egg. (S&H 585)
"…. bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh" This is the origin of personal attachment, of those obsessive, fearful, dominating, hating, critical or idolatrous relationships.
Mary Baker Eddy writes;
Remember, it is personality, and the sense of personality in God or in man, that limits man. (Miscellaneous Writings 282)
Tomo
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Day 14
Genesis 3:1-6
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
THE SERPENT;
There is a story that a little Sunday School pupil asked his teacher if the serpent in Genesis was the same as the dragon in Revelation. When answered in the affirmative he said "Gee, why didn’t they destroy it while it was still little?"
The serpent in Genesis 3 denies the truth, he’s a liar, a mischief maker, he whispers that there is an advantage in disobeying law and no penalty is attached. He scoffs at those who stand for principle, he questions the validity of sin, blatantly contradicts truth and suggests that good can come from evil. (By the way, that little word "sin" which seems to inflame such passions here on HP merely means "the ways that do not work" – like going through a red traffic light does not work. Traffic lights, like moral law may seem to be an unnecessary inconvenience but they are actually loving protection.)
Speaking of the true creation in Genesis 1, Mary Baker Eddy writes:
The serpent of God's creating is neither subtle nor poisonous, but is a wise idea, charming in its adroitness, for Love's ideas are subject to the Mind which forms them, .. (S&H 515)
But, about the chatty chap in Genesis 3?
From Genesis to the Apocalypse, sin, sickness, and death, envy, hatred, and revenge,--all evil,--are typified by a serpent, or animal subtlety. Jesus said, quoting a line from the Psalms, "They hated me without a cause." The serpent is perpetually close upon the heel of harmony. From the beginning to the end, the serpent pursues with hatred the spiritual idea. In Genesis, this allegorical, talking serpent typifies mortal mind, "more subtle than any beast of the field." In the Apocalypse, when nearing its doom, this evil increases and becomes the great red dragon, swollen with sin, inflamed with war against spirituality, and ripe for destruction. It is full of lust and hate, loathing the brightness of divine glory. (S&H 564)
The serpent promised:
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
YE SHALL BE AS GODS
Well, if any statement contradicts the First Commandment – but of course, that was to come later! I wonder (this is me thinking out loud here) whether there has ever been a time in history when humans have been perceived as gods like they are now with the celebrity worship we practice today? Man has gone through centuries making and worshipping idols out of material substances like stone and wood and there have been rulers, like the Roman Emperors and the Japanese Royal family who were considered ‘divine’, but it seems so wide-spread nowadays. Movie stars, pop singers, footballers, models etc etc
The parent of all human discord was the Adam-dream, the deep sleep, in which originated the delusion that life and intelligence proceeded from and passed into matter. This pantheistic error, or so-called serpent, insists still upon the opposite of Truth, saying, "Ye shall be as gods;" that is, I will make error as real and eternal as Truth. (S&H 307)
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Judy
I can see that ths is going to be an enormous thread. Are you planing to discuss all 50 chapters of Genesis or just up to the to the Cain and Abel story in Genesis 4 ?
I should, at some point, like to come in and discuss Genesis chpts 1 & 2 from another perspective.
Much love
astra
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Astra - oh help no - not all the chapters!! Just up to where Adam and Eve are expelled, that's all. That's more than enough! It's the comparison between the two accounts, the spiritual and complete and the material and incomplete that I'm trying to stress.
I'm using my old material, but drastically cutting it down, but it's still long. However, it is an important topic, because it has influenced the thinking of Judaism, Christianity and Islam for thousands of years and as I've pointed out, has even affected the health and well-being of millions of women too.
How many women, even if they have never read the Bible in their lives and don't have an idea of what they are alluding to, will say they are feeling ghastly because they have "the curse"? It's a sobering thought.
I look forward to hearing your perspective.
Love,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
EVE:
Poor Eve, upon whom so much is blamed! I hope you all managed to read that really interesting article "I’m not Eve" that I gave the link for above. (The one that starts off telling us that in AD 584 women were declared human by one vote!) This explanation is from it:
"We can look first to St. Augustine (354-430 C.E.). He was bishop of the church in Hippo, North Africa. Often referred to as the father of Western Christianity, Augustine believed that humanity was irreparably damaged by "the fall." According to this theology, Eve was the cause of the fall because she gave Adam, her husband, the forbidden fruit. So the concept of original sin became the basis of most of Western theology, and Eve was identified as the original sinner. The view of women as sinners became strongly entrenched and was preached from pulpits for centuries to come."
So, what was our Eve guilty of? Well – how about "curiosity killed the cat"? She loved to chat (nothing’s changed!) she listened to wrong talk, believed it and fell for it. The serpent got her through food, appearance and false wisdom! When Jesus was confronted by temptation, his answer was "Get thee behind me Satan."
Just thought you might like to read this short article from spirituality.com:
Afghanistan and the theological battle for women's rights
Here's an excerpt:
The scriptural pivot point for female repression is the account of the "Fall" in the first book of the Bible, the Adam and Eve story. Here woman is depicted as being responsible for all human woe because of her disobedience to God. Consciously or not, the shame and guilt associated with this primal disobedience have haunted women for centuries and may have made many of them more or less willing partners in their own subjugation.
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Judy, Can I just comment on what you've written here:
So, what was our Eve guilty of? Well – how about "curiosity killed the cat"? She loved to chat (nothing’s changed!) she listened to wrong talk, believed it and fell for it. The serpent got her through food, appearance and false wisdom! When Jesus was confronted by temptation, his answer was "Get thee behind me Satan."
Sorry to be so blunt here Judy, but do you honestly believe the above comment. It's about time we stopped looking at Adam and Eve as the original sinners - THEY WERE NOT SINNERS, anymore than we are.
The story of Adam and Eve is there to illustrate God giving us free will. The episode with the serpent is in fact the beginning of duality, nothing else and nothing more.
We really need to move away from believing that Eve sinned. Do you think we're here by accident, do you think we've orchestrated this without God's consent? Do you think Eve would have sinned (for want of a better word) if God had chosen for her not to?
The Adam and Eve story represents duality as we know it. This story is not about sinning, or temptation. It is about God granting our request to have the experiences of hot and cold, up and down, it is about experiencing it all, and we can only do that on the Earth plane. WE chose to experience this Earth plane, where choices could be made. Adam and Eve represent the FREE CHOICE that God granted us.
Love and light
Rosi X
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Rosi,
Have you actually read through all my posts here? Well, you obviously couldn't have read the spirituality.com article "I'm not Eve" or you wouldn't be writing this! The whole point of me writing this forum is to show how I read the Bible spiritually, not literally (yes, I'm having some fun with a literal reading of Adam and Eve) in order to free us from the heavy imposition of old theology which is based on Genesis 2.
Christian Science healing is based on the true account of creation in Genesis 1. I don't believe in Genesis 2 allegory for one moment - it's the reason for all that's gone wrong!!
Please stay with me to the end! Please read through my posts properly and don't jump to the wrong conclusion! 🙁 Sob.......
With love,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Judy, Please don't sob[sm=mecry.gif]
Apologies for jumping the gun, that'll teach me!
Love and light
Rosi X
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Before I continue with the Adam and Eve allegory, I’m just going back to Mary Baker Eddy’s explanation before she starts her exegesis of the first chapters of Genesis:
Spiritually followed, the book of Genesis is the history of the untrue image of God, named a sinful mortal. This deflection of being, rightly viewed, serves to suggest the proper reflection of God and the spiritual actuality of man, as given in the first chapter of Genesis. Even thus the crude forms of human thought take on higher symbols and significations, when scientifically Christian views of the universe appear, illuminating time with the glory of eternity. (Science & Health 502)
For anyone interested in the higher meaning of Genesis 1, I really encourage you to read this exegesis. The spiritual understanding that Eddy shares in this book enables even what is termed incurable or terminal disease and disablities to be healed, often instantaneously, as well as the whole range of human sufferings and limitations.
Her spiritual interpretation of Genesis begins here on page 502:21
OK, back to our story:
TELL ME WHICH GOD YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE,
GENESIS 1 OR GENESIS 2?
Has it struck you what a weak and contradictory "god" we have here in the dream allegory? He makes living things, but doesn’t know what to call them, (doesn’t recognise their true identity – the word used for ‘name’ in Hebrew means ‘nature’) so has to get Adam (mortal thought) to name them. He’s made man, but man is incomplete, so he has to start all over again – re-do his work (even though the first account assures us that His work is finished and very good).
Then he gives them this beautiful garden, but makes them work in it (a penalty is attached to good). Then he seems to give with one hand and take with the other as he says they can’t have the fruit of one of the trees (so, why has he put it there – to temp them – what’s the purpose of that?) As if that all wasn’t bad enough, he ends by issuing threats. Not a very wise or loving god, this one! The man he’s made is disobedient to him and there’s even another little creature who pops up, contradicting everything he’s just said! Does this god sound rather human to you?
Tyranny, intolerance, and bloodshed, wherever found, arise from the belief that the infinite is formed after the pattern of mortal personality, passion, and impulse. (S&H 94)
Does God create a material man out of Himself, Spirit? Does evil proceed from good? Does divine Love commit a fraud on humanity by making man inclined to sin, and then punishing him for it? Would any one call it wise and good to create the primitive, and then punish its derivative? (S&H 356)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, in the cause of brevity, I won’t go into the fig leaves and the shame bit, as that’s all quite obvious (well, I hope it is, to anyone who sees that the Adam and Eve allegory is human opinion - man's attempt to explain how suffering and guilt entered the world). Next, as a direct result of the temptation put in their path, first the serpent, then Eve and last of all, Adam, are meted out their punishment:
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Day 16
THE CURSE
Genesis 3:
16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
17: And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18: Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
22: 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:
23: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24: 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.
Whew – all that trouble and just because they wanted to know good AND evil – whereas before Eve picked that apple they had been innocent and only knew good.
Although this allegory was written thousands of years ago it has shaped thought and attitudes through the ages, and we may be suffering from it (for instance, the belief that women are cursed to suffer pain and discomfort in all aspects related to childbearing) without even realising what is influencing us.
"Man" in the gender variety (and now too the working female sex) have often accepted that life is one long toil trying to make ends meet and feed mouths etc rather than seeing the infinite abundance of supply unfold as Jesus demonstrated with the loaves and fishes.
Worse still, old theology believes that because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (sin), mankind has to suffer its dire consequence under their curse and for the remainder of history has to carry this burden of being born "into sin". This is the wording of the The Augsburg Confession. Just to make sure nobody thinks I include this in what I believe, I will put it into a quote box, along with some other comments I read in the same article that shocked me:
"Since the fall of Adam, all men begotten in the natural way are born with sin, that is without the fear of God, without trust in God, and with concupiscence, and this disease or vice of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and bringing eternal death upon those not born again through Baptism and the Holy Spirit" (A. C., Art I, Triglot, p. 43).
"This hereditary guilt and depravity is called original sin…. God tells us through the apostle Paul, "The wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). Babies die every day. It therefore must follow that babies are sinful…."
Folks, I’m not writing this to have a go at old theology. If people want to believe this, and they really do, in sincerity and earnestness, then it is their right to do so. I’m writing this to hopefully help FREE you from its effect on your lives, even though you may not even been aware that it has influenced you.
Did you read that article yesterday - Afghanistan and the theological battle for women's rights? This is from it:
A revision of this attitude, and the consequent elevation of womanhood, is coincident with a more spiritual interpretation of Scripture, one that acknowledges the divine nature and infinite value of both men and women. Such a view does not have to be created. It is already plainly stated in the very first creation account in the Bible, though historically it largely has been ignored or itself made subservient to the "Fall" story: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he t
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Dear Friends,
I have read everyone's posts, and IMHO, Judy expresses the CS interpretation of Genesis exceedingly well. Having looked through Judy's posts, it seems to me that the whole 'Adam and Eve' story in Genesis 1-4 is based on a spiritual occurrence, perhaps not a physical one. Christian Science pulls together the physical, the spiritual and the mental aspects of life, and certainly uses them to explain and interpret the original Bible teachings. I am not a Christian in the accepted sense, but I can understand from where the authors of the original Gospels were coming from. Mary Baker Eddy understood the relationship between God and man, especially from a scientific and spiritual point of view. It is only the later alterations of the original texts that we see today, and many of the earlier spiritual thoughts and teachings have been 'lost.'
Love, Patsy.
😉
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hello Patsy,
I'd hoped you were lurking there somewhere!
I was just musing about the stark difference between the two accounts of creation. They were written by different authors and actually, Genesis 1, the spiritual creation was written about 300 years later than the Adam and Eve allegory (which I have to admit, I don't find spiritual at all! ;))
Whoever the editor was when it was all compiled, he obviously had good reasons for just putting the two accounts side by side. To me, they represent the truth and the lie about it. It never ceases to amaze me how many Christians seem to ignore it the immense spiritual truth and power in Genesis 1. Perhaps they have just read it like a historical document, from a material standpoint, and, realising that the world couldn't possibly have been made in a literal 6 days, dismiss it and move on to Adam and Eve. (But there again, as you said in the post which prompted me to write this - the world couldn't have started with just two people - where did the wives for Cain and Abel come from etc) Some readers lump the chapters together so they end up with Adam and Eve in the image and likeness of God which makes God weak and human!
Hmm.
Anyway, I must get on as I'm back flying from Thursday for 6 days and would like to finish this sooner rather than later!
With love,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
So, after this weak, punishing god has cursed the serpent, he turns his wrath on the woman.
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
As I’ve said before, the belief in this curse is still very strong! The last bit – the subjugation of women, is, in the West at least, crumbling, but as you all know, it is still widespread elsewhere, especially in some Islamic countries.
So, we women are supposed to have painful periods, painful childbirth and then, if not painful, at least a distressing menopause, all because Eve listened to that serpent and ate the apple! Sigh. When you’re tempted to believe these lies, just remind yourself that "I’m not Eve."
Mind controls the birth-throes in the lower realms of nature, where parturition is without suffering. Vegetables, minerals, and many animals suffer no pain in multiplying; but human propagation has its suffering because it is a false belief. Christian Science reveals harmony as proportionately increasing as the line of creation rises towards spiritual man,--towards enlarged understanding and intelligence; but in the line of the corporeal senses, the less a mortal knows of sin, disease, and mortality, the better for him,--the less pain and sorrow are his. When the mist of mortal mind evaporates, the curse will be removed which says to woman, "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children." (S&H 557)
My sister’s experience illustrates what Mrs Eddy meant when she says above the less a mortal knows of sin, disease, and mortality, the better for him,--the less pain and sorrow are his.
She, (unlike me) went to a Christian Science school, joined the church at an early age, therefore most of her friends were C.S. and on top of that, when she worked both before her marriage and then after her children were grown, it was for Christian Scientists. She told me that one day she went to a W.I. meeting (Women’s Institute for the non-Brits, like in Calendar Girls) and hadn’t realised that the topic was going to be the menopause, or she wouldn’t have gone (we don’t tend to listen to or watch any medical programmes or read medical descriptions so as not to allow the images of disease to fix themselves in our thought).
Anyway, Chrys said that she sat there absolutely amazed listening to all these descriptions of the symptoms she should have suffered from (but hadn’t known about!). By this time she was well past it all and just rejoiced that she hadn’t been touched by fruit of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil"!
As Eddy says:
That body is most harmonious in which the discharge of the natural functions is least noticeable. (S&H 478)
Those early readers of Science & Health often wrote of painless childbirth, here are a couple of examples:
"I now write of the wonderful demonstration of Truth over the birth of my baby boy, two weeks ago. Sunday, September 23, we went for a long drive of three hours; at night I retired at the usual hour; toward morning I was given a little warning; when I awoke at seven o'clock, the birth took place. Not more than ten minutes after, I ate a hearty breakfast, and then had a refreshing sleep;.............
If it had not been for the presence of my young hopeful, it would have been hard to believe that there had so recently been a belief of a birth in the house; but then, I was sustained by Love, and had no belief of suffering to take my strength away………..How grateful I am for the obstetrics of this grand Science! Mothers need no longer listen to the whispering lies of the old serpent, for the law of mortal mind is broken by Truth." MRS. DORA HOSSICK, Carrolton, Mo.
"I will mention a demonstration of painless childbirth which I have had since coming to Idaho………. I awoke my husband one morning at five o'clock, and at half past five baby was born, no one being pre
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Well Judy I do respect CS's view of Genesis and I find your interpretation very detailed and clear and there are resonances with my views although I don't agree with all you say.
So I'd like to offer another view (with some copied CS texts for comparison) and I've chosen the Hebraic texts, which are the foundations to Genesis and I have to say at the outset I am no Scholar, for you certainly need to be that to understand Hebrew language in its root and grammatical form. And I'm only talking about the recent translations of ancient texts for original Hebrew was always transmitted orally and later when inscribed tablets were eventually found they contained only consonants.
Another problem of course was in subsequent and varied translations/transliterations which ultimately give us the current version(s) of Genesis that are in use now.
To add another dynamic, parallels have been made between Sumerian Creation Myth Enuma Elish and the creation depiction in Genesis 1, with sources stating that the Sumerian version is at least 1000 years older than Hebraic texts.
Anyway Genesis, as the first book of the Pentateuch, was transcribed in cipher, based on the 22 letters of the Hebrew language and only the Priests and Rabbis truly understood the inner meaning. So there are enormous problems to the accuracy of Genesis, as the source knowledge of Creation within English translation...but there does remain seeds of truth within the words that are written there and can truly Inspire
Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 describe two aspects of the creative process of the Creation then of the Formation. These processes are distinctly separate but never the less are connected to all the four worlds of the Kabbalah ( inner teachings)
The first being the Divine world and the last being this world, the world of Action, with Creation and Formation being the second and third worlds.
Genesis 1 is the unfolding of Creation from the already existing Divine world, which itself came into existence from the Ain Soph where the unmanifested Holy One Was; Is and Will Be.
The unfolding of Creation begins with the words of the first chapter and first verse of Genesis:
brashith bra alhim ath hshmim vath hartz
"In the beginning the Elohim created the substance of the heavens and the substance of the earth."
which is the seed plot to the whole of the Bible, according to the inner teachings.
Mary Baker Eddy: "The infinite has no beginning.This word beginning is employed to signify the only,-- that is, the eternal verity and unity of God and man, including the universe. The creative Principle--Life, Truth, and Love--is God..."
So yes, the infinite One lies within Ain Soph of no beginning/end and manifesting or emanating in the Divine world to begin the process of Creation,
Right away there is a problem with the word *god*. The Hebraic transliterated version of Alhim becomes Elohim, which is then translated into Deus of the Vulgate and then God of subsequent English translations.
The inner teachings say that the Elohim proceeded from the Three in One aspect of the Holy One and are the creator gods of Genesis 1 and are feminine in nature. They are six in number, and they create the six Days, resting within the Seventh, (always ready to begin the next Octave of Creation again)
The Days and all that is contained within belong to the world of Creation and are the archetypal blue print for the following worlds of Formation and Action.
And Adam (Kadmon) is created on Day six and is the prototype of future mankind, male and female both
"And the Elohim created Mankind: in the Likeness of the Elohim created they them: Male and Female created they them."
Genesis 2 describes the world of Formation in which the created androgynous Adam Kadmon forms and separates into Male and Female within the Gar
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Yes it is well known that *Eve* is blamed for the "sins of mankind" a terribly primitive and uneducated view but understandable in light of the reign of 6000 years of Patriarchy and the Male gods of its religions
The outer teachings of Torah./Pentateuch are extremely weighted towards the supremacy of the Male and of course much of that is depicted in the OT and it doesn't get much better with Paulian view of Christianity, followed by the Early Fathers of Roman Church.
The inner teachings of the Hebraic texts, depicted in the Sepher Yetzirah, Zohar and others, understand the intrinsic nature of the Female Principle in Creation, then in Formation and she was/is indeed the Life Giver.
There is of course much more to discuss on these first two Chapters; also on the Nasach, translated as the Shining One (or Serpent as it's commonly known) , but that's very involved.
But I'd like to say something on the meaning of *sin* and *evil* from inner teachings.
Sin very simply means separation, and as Adam Kadmon moves from the world of Emanation, or Divine Thought, to Creation, Formation then to the Fall the more "sin" or separation occurs.
Evil is a bit more complex.
In the context of Chapter 1 v 31:
...and behold it (creation) was good...
*evil* did not form part of this creation, as opposed to previous creations that were not perfect and had to be "destroyed". But in the destruction of previous creations the "shells" somehow got mixed up with the latter worlds and they became the demons and fallen ones.
Another meaning of *evil* is when it's used in relation to the Tree of Life...the pillars or sides are depicted as Good and Evil
The two sides are the Force and Form kept in check by Love ( Life)... or the positive and negative polarities of existence.
When the negative side becomes unbalanced then unfortunately the biblical term of Evil is used.
Words of this kind do become emotive and can be used to hurt and destroy....in my view it's helpful to check the etymology of such words to understand their true meanings.
astra
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Hi Astra,
Thank you very much for this - looks fascinating! I have printed it out and will certainly get back to you after I have digested it.
Thanks very much,
Love,
Judy
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Dear Astra,
Well, I’ve been delighted and really interested reading your posts above. I know only too well, how long it takes to research and type it all out and it is soul-destroying when you realise that others don’t bother to read what you write properly, so I have been trying to do you justice! It sounds like you (how do you say it?) are a student of Kabbalah? I think it’s wonderful how many faiths are finding that the mystic teachings (once obscure and buried) are now so much in demand! I love hearing Sufi teachings, but then most Muslims would probably say it’s not Islam…….
As you said:
there are enormous problems to the accuracy of Genesis, as the source knowledge of Creation within English translation...but there does remain seeds of truth within the words that are written there and can truly Inspire
Astra, I too am not a Bible scholar, but you’ve hit the nail on the head there. To me, it’s what inspires that is important. If what you are understanding brings healing and reformation and a complete transformation of your thinking, then what does it matter if the actual words are not exact original, so long as the meaning is there?
Mary Baker Eddy observed:
The chief difficulty in conveying the teachings of divine Science accurately to human thought lies in this, that like all other languages, English is inadequate to the expression of spiritual conceptions and propositions, because one is obliged to use material terms in dealing with spiritual ideas. (Science & Health 349)
English is certainly less adequate than Hebrew which is the most spiritual language there is. I was doing some research about the word "love". There are three words for it in Greek, but I believe it was about 13 in Hebrew – although many are now out of usage.
four worlds of the Kabbalah ( inner teachings)
The first being the Divine world and the last being this world, the world of Action, with Creation and Formation being the second and third worlds.
That’s a very interesting concept! I only ever think of either the spiritual and real or the material and illusory.
The inner teachings say that the Elohim proceeded from the Three in One aspect of the Holy One and are the creator gods of Genesis 1 and are feminine in nature. They are six in number, and they create the six Days, resting within the Seventh, (always ready to begin the next Octave of Creation again)
Did you see the discussion I had with Venetian? He also pointed out that Elohim was Three in One – love the fact that they are feminine in nature! Mary Baker Eddy was aware of the plurality (even though Bible scholarship in the 19th C was not as advanced as it is today) This was her view:
The eternal Elohim includes the forever universe. The name Elohim is in the plural, but this plurality of Spirit does not imply more than one God, nor does it imply three persons in one. It relates to the oneness, the tri-unity of Life, Truth, and Love. (Science & Health 515)
In divine Science, we have not as much authority for considering God masculine, as we have for considering Him feminine, for Love imparts the clearest idea of Deity. (S&H 517)
(That was blasphemous in the 19th Century!!)
The numerals of infinity, called seven days, can never be reckoned according to the calendar of time. These days will appear as mortality disappears, and they will reveal eternity, newness of Life, in which all sense of error forever disappears and thought accepts the divine infinite calculus. (S&H 520)
however the god depicted in this world of Formation proceeds from the Elohim and is known exoterically as Yahweh (from a combination of Yah, which is the father and Elohim, pertaining to the mother.) but that name has much more complexity to it and a study of the Tetragrammation describes the deep meaning behind that name and its function as part of the creative process.
That’s v
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
I have a delightfully readable book which I mentioned on the Book Review pages (and where to get it) It’s called The Search for God – A spiritual history of a race of men who loved God so deeply that they set out to inquire about Him It’s written by a Bible scholar called Marchette Chute.
I am totally in empathy with her views about Genesis. Here is the introductory bit:
The first three chapters of the Book of Genesis have been discussed with more passion and fewer results than any other part of the Old Testament. They have been proven to be everything from God’s express and final revelation on the subject of his own creation to a re-working of the old Babylonian legend of Marduk with elements from the Sumerian thrown in. They have been compared with each other and found contradictory; they have been compared with scientific discoveries and found inaccurate; and they have been the storm center of a series of controversies that have ultimately proven nothing.
The weakness of all these explanations is that they ignore the fundamental problem that the three chapters present, a problem which is obvious to the most casual reader and yet one for which no satisfactory explanation has ever been given.
The first three chapters of the Book of Genesis do not tell of one creation of the world. They tell of two. In the first chapter and continuing into the second, God creates the world. Then, beginning with the fourth verse of the second chapter, another God creates a different kind of a world altogether.
This second creation is not an amplification or continuation of the first one. Everything has been "finished" (Gen. ii.1) in the first creation, including man, and the work has been pronounced "good." (Gen. i.31) Whereupon a new creator with a different title appears and makes man and the world all over again, by a different method and with different results.
These two creations stand side by side in the Book of Genesis, without connective and without explanation. Mankind is given two origins and two deities, and there is no suggestion in the text of how the two may be reconciled. They cannot, in fact, be reconciled. There is no point of contact between the two creators or between the two creations.
The Search for God by Marchette Chute.
RE: A spiritual view of Genesis for Songstress
Day 17
Now it’s Adam’s turn to be cursed and sentenced to a life of toil and trouble and hardship right up to death. Like with Eve’s curse, can you see how this could have affected global thought and expectation?
This translation from the Message Bible is vivid:
[Genesis 3: 17-19
The very ground is cursed because of you;
getting food from the ground
Will be as painful as having babies is for your wife:
you’ll be working in pain all your life long.
The ground will sprout thorns and weeds,
you’ll get your food the hard way,
Planting and tilling and harvesting,
sweating in the fields from dawn to dusk,
Until you return to that ground yourself, dead and buried;
You started out as dirt, you’ll end up dirt."
The word Adam is from the Hebrew adamah, signifying the red color of the ground, dust, nothingness. Divide the name Adam into two syllables, and it reads, a dam, or obstruction........ Here a dam is not a mere play upon words; it stands for obstruction, error, even the supposed separation of man from God, and the obstacle which the serpent, sin, would impose between man and his creator. (Science and Health 338)
Even before the "fall" in the allegory of the Adam-dream, Adam had found himself in a beautiful garden which he had to dress and keep (quite pleasurable and certainly not as bad as toil!) and fruit was provided for food (although of course he was prohibited from eating that tree of the knowledge of good and evil.) Now of course, he’s been tempted and is being punished for it and not only that, but men for the rest of time are being punished, by this weak, vengeful god, sentenced to a lifetime of toil and burden!!
So, let’s compare all this with the spiritual account of Creation in Genesis 1. This is from The Message again:
Genesis 1:28
God blessed them.
"Prosper! Reproduce! Fill Earth! Take charge!
Be responsible for fish in the sea and birds in the air,
For every living thing that moves on the face of the earth."
Then God said, "I’ve given you
Every sort of seed-bearing plant on Earth
And every kind of fruit-bearing tree,
Given them to you for food."
All the good, the perfection, the completeness, the supply which is blessed is already here and then comes that word BUT and then the contradiction comes onto the scene. Doesn’t it often seem like that in life? Everything is going so well and it seems something just has to come up to ruin it all! Don’t accept it! This is just part of the Adam-dream - it is not the reality of Life which is all-good!
Our spiritual selfhood, God’s likeness, doesn’t have to toil - all we need is already supplied. We are blessed. We are given dominion and authority over all material beliefs and limitations.