fond of Plotinus and Juan...and while i cant agree with the "nothing but ritualized cannibalism...as practiced by the great majority of" parts...finding it refreshing to read glimpses of a bold and developed progressive view of Communion around here.
Wondering...can you elaborate on what you mean by "ancient vision of God's feast" and "ancient schemes turned to modern dreams"?
About three years ago,I wound up in intensive care for a few days. I had come down with diabetes without knowing it, and by the time we found out, my blood sugar level was 1010, 10 points off the scale. 300 can be fatal. My body had gone into shut-down mode, and I hadn't been able to eat anything for God knows how long. I remember laying there one night in IC, unable to sleep for all the gurgling and sloshing and belching and growling going on in my gut. It was my digestive system re-hydrating, coming back on-line after having shut down to die.
They brought me breakfast the next morning. It included a half an English muffin with a little margarine and grape jelly on it. I picked up that muffin and considered it for about a half hour before I could bite it. It was CARBS! Because I had abused my intake of CARBS, I had almost died. Yet I couldn't go on living without eating CARBS! The Lord taught me more in that half hour about the Bread of Life and communion than I have ever read or heard. When Jesus did what He did, and said what He said at the last supper, He didn't mean to introduce some mystical ritual that could only be performed by the initiated. It was more like saying "Grace" before or after a meal.
Regarding the bread as Christ's body and the wine as His blood was meant as a mnemonic device, an aid to memory, for people to keep in the front of thier attention the price Jesus paid for our salvation, ensuring that salvation.
The original "eucharists" weren't little slivers of cracker and tiny sips of grape juice. They were whole pitch-in dinners, where everybody ate together. Referring to the "body" and the "blood" was intended to remind everybody of what Christ had done for them so they could be together!
"Communion" (and "excommunication") have been abused, but that ain't Jesus' fault!
to celebrate God's generous goodness to all of creation
are welcome to join us in sharing this bread and this cup."
After reading, I thought I'd add my two cents. And well, it is a differing view, so I wanted to say that in case you weren't interested in hearing one! lol.. Not to say my view is the "right" view but a view, so I'm not dissing anyone here.
But to me, communion. What Christ did, was nothing new in the ritual sense. This wasn't something he just made up on his own. Oh yeah, here, this bread, is my body, eat it.. I like cannibals! lol.. Or, I like to start a new meal ritual. lol.. But rather this was the ushering of the new covenant. Take drink, this is the new covenant given to you.. (Mat 26:28)..
Covenants were entered into in this way. This was not new and is attested to throughout the Old Covenant (known to many as the Old "Testament"[terrible translation]).
This was done by Israel when they gathered on the mount to hear God's will and commit to this covenant (the old covenant). A covenant is not just any commitment or promise. It is one made for life. Just as the covenant of marriage (The covenant with Israel was considered a marriage). Something many today take lightly. But it was taken extremely seriously in those days.
Without going into too much detail since this is just a post to give an opinion not a teaching, the two parts, breaking of the flesh and the taking of the blood were vital. In the old, God promised to protect them, guide them, care for them, as they promised to obey his will. The people were to cleanse themselves first(yes, baptism in the OT) before accepting this covenant and come with a clean body and fresh mind. The law was read and the people agree "All that you say, we will do". Upon that, the animals were sacrificed. Cut in two. The sacrifice signified the covenant was a vow until death and worthy of death if broken(just as the flesh was broken). And the eating of that flesh(bread for us) was an acceptance of those terms. The blood then was sprinkled upon the people and the altar(representing God) uniting the two in this agreement by blood(Just as we drink of the cup).
This was not just some feast. It was an ushering of the new covenant. And everytime it was done was a remembrance of our covenant with God. The new covenant. It is not to be taken just because you are hungry or without understanding. (This is what Corinthians corrects). It is a vow you are making to God and an extremely serious vow at that.
Is this taught much these days.. No. Lost.. But it doesn't change the fact of its purpose. And there are many many other things tying the two together. Christ didn't die ONLY so that we might just be free. But further in that freedom so that we are free to bind ourselves in covenant with God. It broke the bonds of the adversary, that pact we made with sin. Christ broke it with his death as we died with him, when we accept this covenant and become united with God, and agree to trust and obey Him.
Anyways.. I won't continue now, or it will become too long..
Communion. Was originally the acceptance of the new covenant (Or as bad translations put it, new testament. It turned from a vow to just a testimony. Just as marriage now days has become for many. They were both till death do you part. But now, it's just a temporary agreement for many.).
Sorry for my lack of knowledge on holy communion, I hope you don't
mind if I ask TrustAndObey for some insight. I remember reading
about people getting sick and death coming early to some, could this be
from not having a worthy heart? I mean, I have seen people get born
again by going up to the alter, and I kept seeing some of the same
people going up to the alter to get born again over and over again, could
that have been going on, people committing themselves to the
covenant over and over again?
I agree with what TrustAndObey wrote, teachme. Communion does commemorate entering into the New Covenant. But it's okay to do it over and over again in order to remember the covenant. In fact, Jesus tells us to do it EVERY TIME WE EAT! So doing it over and over again is not like trying to get born again over and over again.
... it's okay to do it over and over again in order to remember the covenant. In fact, Jesus tells us to do it EVERY TIME WE EAT! So doing it over and over again is not like trying to get born again over and over again.
It's like you got married, took the vows, and now are re-taking and re-affirming those vows you took.. That's all.. Nothing to do with being "born again" again.. Everything to do with our covenant with the God of all gods..
And what is the New Covenant? An exclusively Christian thing?
Anyone may partake of this vow.. The question is do they want to? Why would take part in a covenant/vow with God if you do not know the terms of this covenant. Best not to take part in the covenant. Enjoy the fellowship and food. And leave the vow to a later time when you're ready to make that commitment. But IMHO, it is a vow not to be taken lightly as if some "love feast" for feasting sakes, but rather a feast that binds you with God and His love. An everlasting bond, and therefore tread lightly lest you wish to divorce later.
It's like you got married, took the vows, and now are re-taking and re-affirming those vows you took.. That's all.. Nothing to do with being "born again" again.. Everything to do with our covenant with the God of all gods..
Anyone may partake of this vow.. The question is do they want to? Why would take part in a covenant/vow with God if you do not know the terms of this covenant. Best not to take part in the covenant. Enjoy the fellowship and food. And leave the vow to a later time when you're ready to make that commitment. But IMHO, it is a vow not to be taken lightly as if some "love feast" for feasting sakes, but rather a feast that binds you with God and His love. An everlasting bond, and therefore tread lightly lest you wish to divorce later.
The terms of the New Covenant are set forth in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews 8:8-12. The only thing added to the covenant after the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the mystery and grace committed to Paul to steward, "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel". (Ephesians 3:6)
While i agree that the progressive view of communion is a huge and vital step towards realizing anything close to the scope of "peace on earth good will towards all"...but it seems there are even more steps possible...but steps that cannot be taken until that radical human inclusivity is first introduced.
And imho, a next step possible after a progressive view communion is an even more whole-istic view of communion…where we not only connect the dots between food and medicine, but between human diet and the well-being of the rest of life on earth…and this includes the quality of the air, water and soil.
In other words, it is progress if everyone can eat, but even more so if everyone can eat in a way that prevents both illness and the desertification of the earth.
edited to add...and i cant help but feel that if Jesus was trying to imbed a better way to live in the language and imagination of the world...it at least included such ecological and medicinal concerns.
and not only would i add sustainable food/land/resource-management, but consider how Jesus's "new deal" for his students may have involved the end of eating herbivores and most other animals.
"this is my meat...this is my blood...remember this every time you eat..." may be a powerful dietary statement...and the reason why Paul connected it directly to health.
to be "washed in the blood of the lamb" may have less to do with metaphysical or 'spiritual' or psychological change, and more to do with a real embodied transformation by way of a disciplined and devoted lifestyle (which then includes psychological, spiritual, metaphysical, etc...)
the 'idols' of "eating animals sacrificed to idols" may be humanity.
and it may be that while Jesus was for everyone in many ways, the transformative lifestyle he was asking of his students was quite specific, and quite radical, and very few chose it.
But while 'eternal life' is not dependent on such a 'diet of consciousness' (thank God), or becoming a student of Jesus, the quality of the world we leave in our wake certainly does.
oops, seems i forgot "none of the above" before "all of the above"..."zen before tantra" if one was to compare eastern words.
if we ever all make it back through the fire to eden...seems it will at least involve us remembering food is beautiful medicine and the earth is a vast but finite garden.
...and trees of good and evil are not evil, just toxic to humans...and we do very well to abstain from putting it anywhere near our mouths.
which, imho, points to the nondual and nonviolent visions and voices of Christian and non-Christian history and today.
I sure would be funny to us today but in fact it was art work with tones of tasted
like what does tree taste like?
but it no good for man to eat!
but I want to try it once!
but you will die!
what is death I have tasted from tree?
it tasted like ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ unknown thing to man!
Recommended Posts
sirguessalot
fond of Plotinus and Juan...and while i cant agree with the "nothing but ritualized cannibalism...as practiced by the great majority of" parts...finding it refreshing to read glimpses of a bold and developed progressive view of Communion around here.
Wondering...can you elaborate on what you mean by "ancient vision of God's feast" and "ancient schemes turned to modern dreams"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
I used to hear in church before communion...
"All those who are baptized in the Christian faith
are welcome to partake of these gifts."
before that, some churches would only serve communion
to members who had attended church at least once that previous month.
This was the original reason for pads of paper in pews
that one signed when you went to church.
Then I heard, (much hipper)
"All those who sincerely desire a closer relationship with their Lord Jesus
are invited and encouraged to participate in this sacrament."
This eliminates baptism (no need to SIT or show papers)
but stipulates with two words ("their Lord")
that one be Christian.
What I'd like to hear now is something like:
"God's generous gifts are for everyone.
All who desire to participate in a meal
to celebrate God's generous goodness to all of creation
are welcome to join us in sharing this bread and this cup."
...reminds me of The Kingdom of God is a Party,
a fine book by the funny Christian author/speaker/teacher, Anthony Campolo.
John Dominick Crossan teaches that eating meals is a major aspect of Jesus' earthly ministry.
In them he shows that radical inclusiveness is a sine quae non of the kingdom of heaven.
The old Eucharistic tag line, ministers say, then begins to make more sense,
"When we eat this bread, and drink this cup, we do proclaim
what Christ as done, until He comes again in glory."
What Christ has done is accept us... all of us.
All without exception.
Who ever thought that "Christian" should be used as a visible divider?
Jesus divides, but not by Christian vs. non-Christian
Jesus divides along other lines.
Show us the lines, God.
And keep us on the right side of the divide!
I guess we perceive the lines only by walking with Jesus.
(sorta like the river won't divide until we step in it?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Let me ask.. who is invited to the feast?
the question is sincere.. though asked in laughter..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Ok---Let me see if I understand this. Jesus was the one who coined the phrase "Eat Me!"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
About three years ago,I wound up in intensive care for a few days. I had come down with diabetes without knowing it, and by the time we found out, my blood sugar level was 1010, 10 points off the scale. 300 can be fatal. My body had gone into shut-down mode, and I hadn't been able to eat anything for God knows how long. I remember laying there one night in IC, unable to sleep for all the gurgling and sloshing and belching and growling going on in my gut. It was my digestive system re-hydrating, coming back on-line after having shut down to die.
They brought me breakfast the next morning. It included a half an English muffin with a little margarine and grape jelly on it. I picked up that muffin and considered it for about a half hour before I could bite it. It was CARBS! Because I had abused my intake of CARBS, I had almost died. Yet I couldn't go on living without eating CARBS! The Lord taught me more in that half hour about the Bread of Life and communion than I have ever read or heard. When Jesus did what He did, and said what He said at the last supper, He didn't mean to introduce some mystical ritual that could only be performed by the initiated. It was more like saying "Grace" before or after a meal.
Regarding the bread as Christ's body and the wine as His blood was meant as a mnemonic device, an aid to memory, for people to keep in the front of thier attention the price Jesus paid for our salvation, ensuring that salvation.
The original "eucharists" weren't little slivers of cracker and tiny sips of grape juice. They were whole pitch-in dinners, where everybody ate together. Referring to the "body" and the "blood" was intended to remind everybody of what Christ had done for them so they could be together!
"Communion" (and "excommunication") have been abused, but that ain't Jesus' fault!
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
After reading, I thought I'd add my two cents. And well, it is a differing view, so I wanted to say that in case you weren't interested in hearing one! lol.. Not to say my view is the "right" view but a view, so I'm not dissing anyone here.
But to me, communion. What Christ did, was nothing new in the ritual sense. This wasn't something he just made up on his own. Oh yeah, here, this bread, is my body, eat it.. I like cannibals! lol.. Or, I like to start a new meal ritual. lol.. But rather this was the ushering of the new covenant. Take drink, this is the new covenant given to you.. (Mat 26:28)..
Covenants were entered into in this way. This was not new and is attested to throughout the Old Covenant (known to many as the Old "Testament"[terrible translation]).
This was done by Israel when they gathered on the mount to hear God's will and commit to this covenant (the old covenant). A covenant is not just any commitment or promise. It is one made for life. Just as the covenant of marriage (The covenant with Israel was considered a marriage). Something many today take lightly. But it was taken extremely seriously in those days.
Without going into too much detail since this is just a post to give an opinion not a teaching, the two parts, breaking of the flesh and the taking of the blood were vital. In the old, God promised to protect them, guide them, care for them, as they promised to obey his will. The people were to cleanse themselves first(yes, baptism in the OT) before accepting this covenant and come with a clean body and fresh mind. The law was read and the people agree "All that you say, we will do". Upon that, the animals were sacrificed. Cut in two. The sacrifice signified the covenant was a vow until death and worthy of death if broken(just as the flesh was broken). And the eating of that flesh(bread for us) was an acceptance of those terms. The blood then was sprinkled upon the people and the altar(representing God) uniting the two in this agreement by blood(Just as we drink of the cup).
This was not just some feast. It was an ushering of the new covenant. And everytime it was done was a remembrance of our covenant with God. The new covenant. It is not to be taken just because you are hungry or without understanding. (This is what Corinthians corrects). It is a vow you are making to God and an extremely serious vow at that.
Is this taught much these days.. No. Lost.. But it doesn't change the fact of its purpose. And there are many many other things tying the two together. Christ didn't die ONLY so that we might just be free. But further in that freedom so that we are free to bind ourselves in covenant with God. It broke the bonds of the adversary, that pact we made with sin. Christ broke it with his death as we died with him, when we accept this covenant and become united with God, and agree to trust and obey Him.
Anyways.. I won't continue now, or it will become too long..
Communion. Was originally the acceptance of the new covenant (Or as bad translations put it, new testament. It turned from a vow to just a testimony. Just as marriage now days has become for many. They were both till death do you part. But now, it's just a temporary agreement for many.).
Edited by TrustAndObeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
teachmevp
Sorry for my lack of knowledge on holy communion, I hope you don't
mind if I ask TrustAndObey for some insight. I remember reading
about people getting sick and death coming early to some, could this be
from not having a worthy heart? I mean, I have seen people get born
again by going up to the alter, and I kept seeing some of the same
people going up to the alter to get born again over and over again, could
that have been going on, people committing themselves to the
covenant over and over again?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I agree with what TrustAndObey wrote, teachme. Communion does commemorate entering into the New Covenant. But it's okay to do it over and over again in order to remember the covenant. In fact, Jesus tells us to do it EVERY TIME WE EAT! So doing it over and over again is not like trying to get born again over and over again.
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
teachmevp
I remember in my early searching days, one sunday I waited across the street
from a Jewish church, I waited for two hours, but no one showed up; I saw
people showing up at this other church, so I went their, a greek
orthedock or something like that, but they gave me some kind of
bread, and as I ate some, some of that bread fell to the ground, they
told me not to let the bread fall to the ground. That was trippe, but not
as trippe to find out that Jewish churches meet on Saturdays. It seems that
the attitudes of some might have caused them trouble?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Pax, I think the dividing is in the mind, the thoughts and intents of the heart.
To show and see ourselves more clearly.
I like what you said about it not being Christian-non Christian,
knowing there are many which know Christ without the label.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
Thanks to all for your thoughtful responses.
I must confess I have not yet read slowly and carefully each response - I will.
so this might be premature but...
(as I have two mouths and one ear lol)
Yes, H.C. is entering into and participating in the New Covenant.
AGREED
And what is the New Covenant?
an exclusively Christian thing?
or...
A Christian way to celebrate and remember
God's radical acceptance of everyone*
to the (already/not yet) reign of peace and justice
presided over by God
and shown perfectly for us in Jesus Christ
Thus, H.C. is participation in a metaphorical agape feast for..... ?
you decide
..just Christians?
or everybody?
Your answer to that will determine what kind of Christian you will be
exclusive?
or inclusive?
and whichever you decide
is what Holy Communion will confirm
in your heart and soul
each time you partake
* "Come unto me ALL ye who labor and are heavy laden" - is a very common H.C. invitation quote
or should the heavy revvy say,
"Come unto me all ye who self-identify as my personal flock
and I will give you rest?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
It's like you got married, took the vows, and now are re-taking and re-affirming those vows you took.. That's all.. Nothing to do with being "born again" again.. Everything to do with our covenant with the God of all gods..
Anyone may partake of this vow.. The question is do they want to? Why would take part in a covenant/vow with God if you do not know the terms of this covenant. Best not to take part in the covenant. Enjoy the fellowship and food. And leave the vow to a later time when you're ready to make that commitment. But IMHO, it is a vow not to be taken lightly as if some "love feast" for feasting sakes, but rather a feast that binds you with God and His love. An everlasting bond, and therefore tread lightly lest you wish to divorce later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Pax
the point of these rituals were to teach us
because soon he would be given up his life
with for us is pass tense
he teaching us value of life the gift we received that day
the meaning behind him dying
the victory that he got up
because there were rituals before and there be rituals after
because we made them with our churches
like the saying of VPW that some just like to read
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
The terms of the New Covenant are set forth in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews 8:8-12. The only thing added to the covenant after the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the mystery and grace committed to Paul to steward, "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel". (Ephesians 3:6)
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
Well, I like Holy Communion as a celebration of God's radical universal acceptance and love
it makes it more moving, fun, and meaningful...
than what it used to mean to me
(ie. we Christians are connected to each other and Jesus... a fine message none-the-less)
Pope John XXIII was asked what he was going to do as Pope.
He walked across the room and opened the window.
Aggiornamento, they called it, with hope and joy.
"This bread and this wine represent God's radical invitation to ALL to dine in the kingdom of God."
Come all you without money, without power, without the requisite good looks and fine education.
Come to the feast of the lamb, all you who labor
Come, partake of the tree with twelve kinds of fruit, that bears its fruit each month...
and whose leaves are for the healing of all the peoples
who have AIDS, who have malaria, fevers, malnutrition ...
Who've lost their babies... their husbands... their hope.
They took your job so you couldn't feed your family.
They took your daughter in front of you, then killed her casually.
Who have died in coal mines, who coughed out their lungs with coal dust.
Who are sickened unto spiritual death by the toxin of worldly wealth...
Who are addicted to substances and cannot stop, cannot stop, cannot stop ...
You were tortured, raped, intimidated, spat upon, shut up in prisons...
YOU!! YOU!!
God invites you to a feast
where there is love without earthly limitations
without questions about which team you've been rooting for ...
"What creeds do you adhere to, Son?"
"Oh God, I was really hoping that You wouldn't ask that question.
Weren't You supposed to be able to see into my sweet aching heart?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
While i agree that the progressive view of communion is a huge and vital step towards realizing anything close to the scope of "peace on earth good will towards all"...but it seems there are even more steps possible...but steps that cannot be taken until that radical human inclusivity is first introduced.
And imho, a next step possible after a progressive view communion is an even more whole-istic view of communion…where we not only connect the dots between food and medicine, but between human diet and the well-being of the rest of life on earth…and this includes the quality of the air, water and soil.
In other words, it is progress if everyone can eat, but even more so if everyone can eat in a way that prevents both illness and the desertification of the earth.
edited to add...and i cant help but feel that if Jesus was trying to imbed a better way to live in the language and imagination of the world...it at least included such ecological and medicinal concerns.
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
SirGuessalot,
If I get you right,
you would add to radical inclusiveness symbolized in Holy COmmunion,
sustainable sources for our food.
That seems a natural ethic for symbolism by Holy Communion
to carry.
What's holy about breaking bread that is grown at the expense
of our children's children's home on earth?
What's holy about wine that's crushed along with the health
of those who drink it?
My church has banned disposable cups, plates, silverware etc. from church functions.
(People love real mugs.)
Our coffeehouse (one of the best venues for live music in NJ)
also, is a Styrofoam Free Zone.
We have our own compost piles --
no chemically & fossil-fuel-fixed nitrogen fertilizers
on our beautiful lawns
Those chemically & fossil-fuel-fixed nitrogen fertilizers
run off into our own drinking water sources
(and we wonder about the increase in cancer! - doh!).
We have our own organic garden too.
Last Sunday the Communion Table was decorated
with LOTS of organically grown:
patty pan, tomatoes (3-4 varieties),
yellow squash, gourds, wax beans,
green beans, turnips, carrots, musk melon,
zukes, cukes, hot peppers, acorn squash and more.
It was beautiful.
We called it "God's Generous Gifts"
and everyone took whatever they wanted home afterwards.
sound holy to you? me too.
Holy Communion sitting on top of unsustained
and unsustainable food sources
is only a wee tiny bit holy, IMHO.
so, I agree,
1. let's accept all into God's fiesta
2. and fiesta in harmony with God's design for breaking bread together
with each other and Mother Nature.
Sign in our church:
"Praise Father, Son, Holy Spirit
and Mother Nature."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
thanks, Pax. sounds like a wonderful way to go.
and not only would i add sustainable food/land/resource-management, but consider how Jesus's "new deal" for his students may have involved the end of eating herbivores and most other animals.
"this is my meat...this is my blood...remember this every time you eat..." may be a powerful dietary statement...and the reason why Paul connected it directly to health.
to be "washed in the blood of the lamb" may have less to do with metaphysical or 'spiritual' or psychological change, and more to do with a real embodied transformation by way of a disciplined and devoted lifestyle (which then includes psychological, spiritual, metaphysical, etc...)
the 'idols' of "eating animals sacrificed to idols" may be humanity.
and it may be that while Jesus was for everyone in many ways, the transformative lifestyle he was asking of his students was quite specific, and quite radical, and very few chose it.
But while 'eternal life' is not dependent on such a 'diet of consciousness' (thank God), or becoming a student of Jesus, the quality of the world we leave in our wake certainly does.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
I read once about Adam and Eve diet
I do not remember the name
but in book they ate while still on vine, tree, or whatever
that it did not even begin to die
but what fall to ground was not to eat
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i once somehow found my self believing nothing about HC in spite of its existence.
then i somehow found my self believing that HC is/was mostly about supernatural power.
then i somehow found my self believing that HC is/was mostly about eternal membership.
then i somehow found my self believing that HC is/was mostly about religious history.
then i somehow found my self believing that HC is/was mostly about social inclusion.
then i somehow found my self believing that HC is/was mostly about food and medicine.
i now somehow find my self believing that HC is/was mostly about all of the above.
and that God is both musical and a gardener...and everything already always belongs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
Hallelujah!
That's a church/home fellowship, whatever, that I'd be proud to belong to!
or a brother that I'd take downtown Elizabeth (NJ) for empanadas!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pax
And, Roy, in fact,
Adam and Eve
did not use their hands
to pick the live fruit, veggies or whatever.
Their hands were occupied
in holding together their fig leaf underwear.
This was a source of much laughter,
as well as nutrition.
[scenes from Paradise]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
oops, seems i forgot "none of the above" before "all of the above"..."zen before tantra" if one was to compare eastern words.
if we ever all make it back through the fire to eden...seems it will at least involve us remembering food is beautiful medicine and the earth is a vast but finite garden.
...and trees of good and evil are not evil, just toxic to humans...and we do very well to abstain from putting it anywhere near our mouths.
which, imho, points to the nondual and nonviolent visions and voices of Christian and non-Christian history and today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Pax
I sure would be funny to us today but in fact it was art work with tones of tasted
like what does tree taste like?
but it no good for man to eat!
but I want to try it once!
but you will die!
what is death I have tasted from tree?
it tasted like ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ unknown thing to man!
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.