From: sheila-mcginty@geotec.net
Date: Wed Jan 22 2003 - 08:48:17 EST
Rich and Everyone,
Please accept my humble apologies. Please forgive me. My intention was not
to be derisive in any way - simply funny. I will be more careful in the
future.
I believe that Adam was created perfect (by God) with the capacity for error.
I believe that Eve was also created perfect by God with the same capacity for
error because Adam and Eve were one flesh - bone of Adam's bone, flesh of his
flesh. The physical and spiritual implications of this simple statement is a
mystery that is generally beyond my understanding. The mystery will probably
be explained at the marriage supper of the Lamb and I can hardly wait to hear
it! God is an amazing, awesome God with mysteries that are so wonderful I am
often left speechless.
Sheila
Quoting RFaussette@aol.com:
> I made this statement:
>
> You are saying that Adam demonstrated the capacity for error before the
> Fall?
> I didn't think he had it until Eve was created.
>
> And got these derisive responses:
>
> +++++++++
> If Adam didn't have the capacity for error until after Eve was created
> from
> his rid,[sic] this means that God took the one perfect part of him to
> create
> woman!
>
> Everything makes sense to me now!
>
> Sheila
> ++++++++
>
> So He accidentally marred Adam in the process of creating Eve? Oh yes,
> there is that missing rib! I never made the link between a missing rib
> and capacity for error!
>
> I admire your dry sense of humor! JimA
>
> ========================================
>
> Where did I ever get such a sense of humor?
>
> Perhaps from Gershom Scholem, author of the Messianic Idea in Judaism.
> In the
> preface, Scholem is called the "master builder of historical studies of
> the
> Kabbalah." What does that have to do with Genesis and the fall? For that
> we
> look to Adolphe Franke:
> From Adolph Franke's The Kabbalah, the religious philosophy of the
> Hebrews.
> "In the Mishna (Haggiga Sec.2) we find this remarkable passage: "The
> story of
> Genesis (the Creation) is not to be explained to two men, the story of
> the
> Merkaba (Heavenly Chariot) not even to one, unless he be wise and can
> deduce
> wisdom of his own accord."
>
> Then:
> "If we are to believe Maimonides, - who, although a stranger to the
> Kabbalah, could not deny its existence - the first half, entitled the
> "Story
> of Genesis," taught the science of nature, and the second half, called
> the
> "Story of the Chariot," contained a treatise on theology. This opinion
> was
> accepted by all the Kabbalists.
>
> So, the concensus among scholars of Jewish mysticism and the Kabbalah is
> that
> Genesis is allegorical since they're not allowed to reveal its real
> meaning.
> That is how they study it. So, what do they say?
>
> "The soul of all mankind was originally contained within Adam. Now its
> sparks
> were scattered throughout the terrestrial universe, and the continued
> existence of sin has ever more increased their dispersion. They are in
> exile
> and must be led home and restored to their primordial spiritual
> structure,
> which is at the same time, the structure of Adam and the structure of
> the
> Messiah." p.187 Scholem
>
> Then on page 227, "Man and God are each only a half finished, incomplete
>
> form. Man without God is really not man, adam, a sublime and spiritual
> being,
> but only dam, blood, a biological entity. He is lacking the a or alef,
> which
> is God, alufo shel olam, the master of the world. Only when the alef and
> dam,
> God and man, get together, the two form a real unity, and only then does
> man
> deserve to be called Adam. But how is such unity, ahdut, to be
> accomplished?
> By kisuf which means the constant striving for union with God. If man
> casts
> off all earthly or material elements and ascends through all the worlds
> and
> becomes one with God to the degree of losing the feeling of separate
> existence, then will he be rightly called adam, Man." Scholem
>
>
> Again from Adolphe Franke: "The first, says the Zohar text, is the
> Ancient,
> seen face to face. It is the supreme head, the source of all light, the
>
> principle of all wisdom, and can be defined only as unity. From this
> absolute
> unity, distinct from the various forms and from all relative unity,
> issue two
> parallel principles, opposite in appearance but inseparable in reality.
> One
> male or active is called Wisdom; the other passive or female, is
> designated
> by a word customarily translated as intelligence." p. 96
>
>
> So, if the structure of God is perfect unity including the male and
> female
> principles, then the structure of the Son of God must also contain male
> and
> female principles. The Jewish Messiah is said to share the structure of
> Adam
> before he had the feeling of separate existence from God, when dam was
> Adam
> and there was perfect unity.
>
> If Jesus is messiah in the Kabbalistic sense, and why shouldn't He be?
> Then
> somewhere in Christian texts there must be allegorical reference to the
>
> perfect unity of Jesus including male and female.
>
> I found these fascinating references to the messiah in Nag Hammadi
> texts, for
> example, the Gospel of Philip:
> "When Eve was still in Adam, death did not exist. When she was separated
> from
> him, death came into being. If he enters again and attains his former
> self,
> death will be no more."
>
> We do accept that Jesus conquered death, do we not? To do so, he must
> attain
> his former self, and forsake multiplicity for unity (with God/as God).
>
> The Gospel of Thomas:
> "They said to him, shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom? Jesus
> said
> to them,"...when you make the male and female one and the same, so that
> the
> male not be male nor the female female."
>
> Jesus said to her, "I am he who exists from the undivided."
>
> Jesus said,"I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that
> she
> too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who
> will
> make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
>
>
> 1 Corinthians: 15-22: As in Adam all men die, so in Christ all will be
> brought to life."
>
> This is what I had originally written that provoked the one line
> responses:
>
> You are saying that Adam demonstrated the capacity for error before the
> Fall?
> I didn't think he had it until Eve was created.
>
> Now you know why I didn't think Adam demonstrated the capacity for error
>
> until Eve was created. Because it was at that point that he was
> 'separated,'
> no longer enjoyed unity and was susceptible to desire which was not an
> issue
> when MALE AND FEMALE WERE ONE. When male and female were one, there was
>
> nothing to desire as everything was contained in one unity and
> perfection.
> With the creation of Eve, Adam was no longer complete in himself and
> neither
> was Eve. The first desire, now that desire could rise from the
> incompleteness
> and separateness of Adam and Eve, was to eat from the Tree of the
> Knowledge
> of Good and Evil. They did this together but as 'separated' beings.
>
> Now you not only understand what I was trying to say, but what the
> Kabbalists
> and the Gnostics also said which prompted it.
>
> Using non-canonical works seems to lead to my being misunderstood. I
> mean to
> give you good information and I find that there is a thread from the
> allegories in Genesis to gershom scholem and adolphe franke's
> interpretation
> of the Kabbalah to the coptic nag hammadi texts that suggests my remark
> that
> "I didn't think Adam had demonstrated the capacity for error until Eve
> was
> created," is absolutely appropriate, in line with all of these texts,
> their
> philosophies and the Biblical scholars who study them and no laughing
> matter
> at all. What I might point out is that in each derisive response the
> writer
> addressed the surface meaning of the allegory, the "rib," - the one
> meant
> for the common people.
>
> rich
>
Sheila McGinty
sheila-mcginty@geotec.net
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through GeoTEC Webmail: webmail.geotec.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jan 22 2003 - 08:48:37 EST