Zone1 Was Eve expelled from Eden, or did she leave with Adam?

[Ace Nova]

mary, joseph, jesus, mary m were never jewish they did not fear moses their commandments nor judaism - that is the 1st century events - they were crucified by judaism for their repudiation of the false religion, commandments hereditary idolatry religion of apartheid et al - 4th century christianity is a reversion of judaism those in the 1st century gave their lives in opposition.

there were non close to jesus than mary m who would defy openly the cause of their death.

Of course they did not "fear Moses" or their commandments. Jesus understood and taught the meanings of them in a broader, Spiritual sense.

What many viewed as "harsh teachings" of the Old Testament - Jesus read and understood them at the level of a cornerstone - where there seemed to be "anger and harshness" - Jesus took in as "True" Love and "Compassion" on both a physical and Spiritual level. The words of the Old Testament were the living words of The Holy Spirit - The same Holy Spirit residing in him.

Jesus and the ones closest to him never feared what was written - they feared the ones they taught would misunderstand or misinterpret the teachings - leading the ones who did not follow him or understood his teachings to persecute them.

 

[ding]

You made it about the entire statement and mentioned nothing of political lackies.

You are being argumentative.

You believe the story of Eden, Adam and Eve has historical validity other than Moses writing it down 2400 years after is supposedly happened?

What did I say? Genesis is an allegorical account that teaches lessons about the covenant, obedience and justice. Specifically that successful behaviors naturally lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. Which is literally the basis for establishing standards.

As for Moses and Exodus... ancient Israelites crafted narratives of historical events to teach lessons about the covenant, obedience and justice. In other words, they embellished historical events to teach those lessons. So did it occur exactly like it was written? No. But something did occur and they embellished that to teach their lessons.

 

[ding]

An example is Matthew 6:24, the quotation of Jesus saying we have a choice between God and mammon. As other parts of this forum point out, all Trump supporters are mammon-worshipers and, therefore, have turned away from God. They are free to make the choice, but must also eventually faces the consequences of following Satan.

Can you spot the absolute statement you made?

 

[Divine Wind]

You are being argumentative.

What did I say? Genesis is an allegorical account that teaches lessons about the covenant, obedience and justice. Specifically that successful behaviors naturally lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. Which is literally the basis for establishing standards.

As for Moses and Exodus... ancient Israelites crafted narratives of historical events to teach lessons about the covenant, obedience and justice. In other words, they embellished historical events to teach those lessons. So did it occur exactly like it was written? No. But something did occur and they embellished that to teach their lessons.

Disagreeing with you is not being argumentative. Please consider being more precise in your posts in the future. TIA.

Agreed Genesis is an allegorical account. Therefore, inferring too much in the story is a matter of perspective, not fact.

 

[rosends]

Don't worry. Men can't decide for God who God invites. Your dogma is wrong.

so you want to deny the entirety of Jewish law. That's great. Just say so. Don't pretend you understand it and can represent it.

 

[ding]

Disagreeing with you is not being argumentative. Please consider being more precise in your posts in the future. TIA.

You only made one absolute statement in your post. You are being argumentative.

Agreed Genesis is an allegorical account. Therefore, inferring too much in the story is a matter of perspective, not fact.

What would be considered to be inferring too much in the story? Am I inferring too much into the story when I say it's about accountability?

 

[Divine Wind]

Can you spot the absolute statement you made?

You're going off topic your own Zone 1 thread, ding.

I mentioned an example about Adam and Eve but you're focusing upon the minutia instead of the main purpose: the fact human beings have God-given free will to choose.

 

[rosends]

For those curious about what the talmud actually says, feel free to read it as i do:

 

[ding]

so you want to deny the entirety of Jewish law. That's great. Just say so. Don't pretend you understand it and can represent it.

And these are the exceptions, the people who have no share in the World-to-Come, even when they fulfilled many mitzvot: One who says: There is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah, and one who says: The Torah did not originate from Heaven, and an epikoros, who treats Torah scholars and the Torah that they teach with contempt. Rabbi Akiva says: Also included in the exceptions are one who reads external literature, and one who whispers invocations over a wound and says as an invocation for healing: “Every illness that I placed upon Egypt I will not place upon you, for I am the Lord, your Healer” (Exodus 15:26). By doing so, he shows contempt for the sanctity of the name of God and therefore has no share in the World-to-Come. Abba Shaul says: Also included in the exceptions is one who pronounces the ineffable name of God as it is written, with its letters.

It all comes down to what is meant by external literature. Which as near as I a can tell means non-canonical and heretic literature.

In the context of the Talmud (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1), reading "external literature" (Hebrew: Sefarim Chitzonim) refers to studying unauthorized, non-canonical books. Rabbi Akiva declared that anyone who does this loses their share in the World to Come. [1, 2, 3]

1. What does "external literature" mean?
Rabbi Akiva and the Sages defined these as sectarian texts or the writings of minim (heretics). This specifically includes: [1]

• Heretical Commentaries: Books containing false or misleading interpretations of the Torah.
• Gnostic/Sectarian Writings: Early splinter-sect literature designed to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism.
• Note: Some Talmudic scholars also interpreted this to include the Apocrypha, though it is a debated topic. [1, 2, 3]

2. Why is it forbidden?
According to Rabbinic tradition, the Torah was given as a complete, divine system. Reading unapproved, alternative books could:

• Introduce heretical ideas that erode foundational Jewish beliefs (e.g., the divine origin of the Torah or the resurrection of the dead).
• Waste time that should be spent studying the authentic Torah, which was considered the ultimate source of truth and spiritual life. [1, 2]

3. Part of a Broader List
This ruling appears in a famous chapter of the Talmud that lists specific individuals and behaviors that bar a person from the afterlife. Alongside reading external books, other severe exceptions include: [1]

• Denying that the Torah is divinely given.
• Denying the resurrection of the dead.
• Being an epikoros (someone who treats Torah scholars and the Torah itself with contempt).
• Whispering healing charms over wounds (which Rabbi Akiva viewed as abusing scriptural verses for superstition). [1, 2, 3]

For a deeper dive into the exact Hebrew text and the range of rabbinic commentary on this passage, you can explore the Mishnah Sanhedrin 10 text on Sefaria. [1]

 

[ding]

You're going off topic your own Zone 1 thread, ding.

When is correcting errors ever off topic?

I mentioned an example about Adam and Eve but you're focusing upon the minutia instead of the main purpose: the fact human beings have God-given free will to choose.

You pontificated on politics is what you did in that post. If anyone went off topic it was you.

Yes, humans have free will. Was that ever in question?

 

[rosends]

And these are the exceptions, the people who have no share in the World-to-Come, even when they fulfilled many mitzvot: One who says: There is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah, and one who says: The Torah did not originate from Heaven, and an epikoros, who treats Torah scholars and the Torah that they teach with contempt. Rabbi Akiva says: Also included in the exceptions are one who reads external literature, and one who whispers invocations over a wound and says as an invocation for healing: “Every illness that I placed upon Egypt I will not place upon you, for I am the Lord, your Healer” (Exodus 15:26). By doing so, he shows contempt for the sanctity of the name of God and therefore has no share in the World-to-Come. Abba Shaul says: Also included in the exceptions is one who pronounces the ineffable name of God as it is written, with its letters.

It all comes down to what is meant by external literature. Which as near as I a can tell means non-canonical and heretic literature.

In the context of the Talmud (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1), reading "external literature" (Hebrew: Sefarim Chitzonim) refers to studying unauthorized, non-canonical books. Rabbi Akiva declared that anyone who does this loses their share in the World to Come. [1, 2, 3]

1. What does "external literature" mean?
Rabbi Akiva and the Sages defined these as sectarian texts or the writings of minim (heretics). This specifically includes: [1]

• Heretical Commentaries: Books containing false or misleading interpretations of the Torah.
• Gnostic/Sectarian Writings: Early splinter-sect literature designed to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism.
• Note: Some Talmudic scholars also interpreted this to include the Apocrypha, though it is a debated topic. [1, 2, 3]

2. Why is it forbidden?
According to Rabbinic tradition, the Torah was given as a complete, divine system. Reading unapproved, alternative books could:

• Introduce heretical ideas that erode foundational Jewish beliefs (e.g., the divine origin of the Torah or the resurrection of the dead).
• Waste time that should be spent studying the authentic Torah, which was considered the ultimate source of truth and spiritual life. [1, 2]

3. Part of a Broader List
This ruling appears in a famous chapter of the Talmud that lists specific individuals and behaviors that bar a person from the afterlife. Alongside reading external books, other severe exceptions include: [1]

• Denying that the Torah is divinely given.
• Denying the resurrection of the dead.
• Being an epikoros (someone who treats Torah scholars and the Torah itself with contempt).
• Whispering healing charms over wounds (which Rabbi Akiva viewed as abusing scriptural verses for superstition). [1, 2, 3]

For a deeper dive into the exact Hebrew text and the range of rabbinic commentary on this passage, you can explore the Mishnah Sanhedrin 10 text on Sefaria. [1]

you aren't really trying to pass off a pastiche of AI generated stuff as an authoritative statement about Jewish law, are you? Did you even read through the sources that are cited? They don't actually support what the AI summary claims. This is what is meant by "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

But hey, if you want to think AI is a perfect authority and want to spout your ignorance of actual Jewish law, you do that.

 

[ding]

you aren't really trying to pass off a pastiche of AI generated stuff as an authoritative statement about Jewish law, are you? Did you even read through the sources that are cited? They don't actually support what the AI summary claims. This is what is meant by "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

But hey, if you want to think AI is a perfect authority and want to spout your ignorance of actual Jewish law, you do that.

I think your religion is so threatened by Christianity that they made it an offense to read the NT punishable by forfeiture of a place in the world to come.

 

[rosends]

I think your religion is so threatened by Christianity that they made it an offense to read the NT punishable by forfeiture of a place in the world to come.

You can think that and yet I quoted Jewish law which doesn't say that. You are trying to create a Jewish approach which doesn't exist so you can criticize it. That's dishonest.

 

[ding]

You can think that and yet I quoted Jewish law which doesn't say that. You are trying to create a Jewish approach which doesn't exist so you can criticize it. That's dishonest.

It does. You just don't want to admit it. It all comes down to what is meant by external literature. Which as near as I a can tell means non-canonical and heretic literature.

Judaism strictly prohibits reading any literature—including early splinter-sect or heretical texts (sfarim chitzonim)—if the explicit purpose or result is to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism or to promote heretical ideas. [1, 2]

 

[Divine Wind]

Yes, humans have free will. Was that ever in question?

It is for those whining about Eve being responsible for Adam's sin.

 

[rosends]

It does.

no, it doesn't and since you know nothing of Jewish law, claiming it does is just more arrogance.

You just don't want to admit it. It all comes down to what is meant by external literature. Which as near as I a can tell means non-canonical and heretic literature.

"near as I can tell"? LOLOLOL! So jewish law explains it, but you have decided to trust your own, uninformed, opinion. Great. Just great.

Judaism strictly prohibits reading any literature—including early splinter-sect or heretical texts (sfarim chitzonim)—if the explicit purpose or result is to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism or to promote heretical ideas. [1, 2]

yes, you should read to see exactly what that refers to. It isn't the gospels, and reading isn't forbidden in cases like I showed in the Hebrew (when I quoted Jewish law...is there a problem? Do you not read Hebrew? Have you not studied actual Jewish law?)

So try again.