Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

[nothing]

You are using the word fault like what occurred was evil.

Try: you are reading the word fault like what occurred was evil.

I do not employ the dichotomy of so-called good and evil if/when inquiring
about anyone or anything, real and/or hypothetical - as this is the very dichotomy
that is admonished of re: Genesis 2:17 - to eat from such a single tree
causes death over death.

This is reflected in/as "believer vs. unbeliever" as it certainly takes
a "believer" to ever "believe" to know such universal roots/absolutes
as good and evil and get them the wrong-way-around: to "believe" evil is good
first requires the element of "belief" and the same is true when Adam
could not account for his own actions such to choose to blame the woman.

This relates to the hijab/niqab/burqa in "belief"-based ideologies
whose presence satisfies the sentiment "truth in plain sight" as
it would take a "believer" to "believe" otherwise.

Christians sing, and as their dogma says, without sin, Yahweh's plan would be derailed.

It sounds comforting, doesn't it? Unfortunately the reality is much different:
each is to account for their own action(s) and no Christian can given
they accept a human sacrifice as atonement for what they "believe"
are their own sins (such to seek forgiveness).

"Belief"-based ideologies are cesspools of ridding guilt, as
Adam did the same when he failed to account for his own actions.

"Blame the woman" is what he (and his fallen progeny) do:
blame the woman, blame the woman, blame the woman.
Next: blame the "Jews", blame the "Christians", blame the "atheists",
the "infidels", the U.S., the West... and anyone and everything
that is not "belief"-based male central figure worship.

Say hello to Nazism: Muhammad and Hitler have much in common,
not the least of which is committing genocide against "Jews" meanwhile
who are the real book-worshiping "Jews" who divide the world on the basis
of "believer vs. unbeliever"? It can only be: the "believers", the same "Jews"
they pathologically scapegoat their own crimes against humanity onto.

Sin is a good thing, which lines up with the Jewish take of Eden being where man was elevated because he furthered god's plan.

One should first start with the veracity of the text itself and where it (actually) came from
prior to what a "Jewish" take would be, as the book-worshiping "Jews" worship books
and not any spirit of the letter which transcends. It has always been so, however
the book-worshiping "Jews" have to hide behind/as other ideologies every
few thousand years. It is the same people - only one root of Nazism.

Adam and Eve are to be praised. Not vilified.

Their actions are to be consciously acknowledged: they could not account for their own actions.
This is what causes one to "fall" such to "believe" others are at fault for a condition(s) of the one.
This is all playing out globally as the Left scapegoating their own crimes against humanity onto the Right
and having the Left "BELIEVE" it is the other way around.

It takes a "believer" to "believe" the opposite of what is true.
It is how the book-worshiping Jews fight their wars:
"us vs. them!" "believer vs. unbeliever".

If the cast in the yarn that is scriptures cannot be seen as hero's, then all, including god are seen as losers.

Only the "believers" are the losers - they know not from which tree they even eat.

It is actually inside the math - if god exists, it must know it is there.

√5 = √(√1+2√4)

This is a mapping of a pentagram: √1 from the top produces two valid roots +1 and -1, the "legs" of the pentagram.
The 2√4 represent those same two directions, in relation to two related "arms" of the pentagram. This is the Α∞Ω
which is a null binary ± (in relation to the √ operation producing ± solutions), the beg∞end thus are as null roots.

One can set these beg∞end roots to the two Edenic trees such to solve for the "orientation" to/from Eden given
the conjugate binary operator all∞not in relation {to know}∞{to believe} satisfies an all-knowing condition:
{to know all not to believe}
however this is only as effective as any/all degree(s) to which one "believes" themselves to be something they are not.

That is not good for adult fairy tales.

They actually began as structural geometric forms however did evolve into fairy tales.
The Hebrew language is composed of one shape when viewed from 22 different perspectives, thus
the so-called books of Moses are employing the use of this form and communicating the structure
of the physical/metaphysical universe. However, hardly anyone can/would appreciate what is there.

[Greatest I am]

"One should first start with the veracity of the text itself"

While recognizing that veracity and myth do not really go together.

There is no real veracity in a myth that has been translated, altered and plagiarized over so many years and changes.

Regards
DL

[Luxin]

Seems you may have nailed me.

Could you pls leave the B ref referring to not adding? Ouch.

Luxin

[godelian]

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Only human behavior can be good or evil. Knowledge is in itself not a behavior. Therefore, it has -- in and of itself -- no moral status.

Therefore , the answer is neither.

[Walker]

The knowledge of evil is good because with that knowledge then one knows that one is serving the wiley evil that so cleverly disguised itself as good. To serve is to act. If one acts contrary to what one knows to be good or evil, then one is a decepticon in the service of either evil or good, which means that deception is a tactic in the strategy of either evil or good, and if isolate from life as a concept then deception can only be amoral, which is how poker pros sleep at night or day, unconflicted with their winnings aquired through deception.

[godelian]

The knowledge of evil is good because with that knowledge then one knows that one is serving the wiley evil that so cleverly disguised itself as good.

So, if you store the text containing the knowledge on a computer, not only will the text itself be "good", but now the computer is also "good". So, there are "good" and "evil" computers. The ones that are "good" store a text with the definition of "good".

There are also "good" and "evil" rocks, because you can etch the definition of "good" onto some of them. Trees are also good and evil.

If you tattoo the definition of good and evil on your face, you also become "good".

[promethean75]

I think i just figured out the secret esoteric meaning of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, u guys. Check this out.

If u eat of the tree you'll shirley perish. But perish from what? Shame. You'll perish from your shame if u have a conscience telling u what you're doing is wrong, is evil.

Everything was kewl with adam and eve runnin around naked until they found that goddamn tree.

This is the most profound irony in the history of theo-eschatological interpretation of the bible, and i found it first.

Everybody blew it when they became moral becuz only then did things appear to be good and evil. That's the secret message; god is an immoralist and now he's abandoned us becuz we became pussies when we were all like 'omg omg where's my clothes? This is all wrong! Wtf am i doing? I should be ashamed of myself!'

[Sculptor]

I think i just figured out the secret esoteric meaning of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, u guys. Check this out.

If u eat of the tree you'll shirley perish. But perish from what? Shame. You'll perish from your shame if u have a conscience telling u what you're doing is wrong, is evil.

Everything was kewl with adam and eve runnin around naked until they found that goddamn tree.

This is the most profound irony in the history of theo-eschatological interpretation of the bible, and i found it first.

Everybody blew it when they became moral becuz only then did things appear to be good and evil. That's the secret message; god is an immoralist and now he's abandoned us becuz we became pussies when we were all like 'omg omg where's my clothes? This is all wrong! Wtf am i doing? I should be ashamed of myself!'

The entire scenario never made sense.
So two naked people running around with nothing on their feet, and not even a protective covering of hair against the vicissitudes of thorns and nettles, and sharp stones under their feet.
Presumably they were equipped as normal people. Were they shagging? They were "unashamed"
The phrase "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." probably means shagging, though.

Now he commands "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
Except he CHANGES his mind and tells them to leave the apple alone!!!

Now the serpent was more subtile than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. No ordinary snake but a talking snake, tells Even to beguile Adam with the apple.

God blames the snake, and commands it to go on its belly.
Then is also pissed off with A&E because they do not want to be nudists any longer.

Is god stupid? Is this the act of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent god, and a weak minded scientist who can't work out the consequences of given humans desire and curiousity, and can't work out that making a smart serpent is going to lead to trouble.


The next bit is easier to understand Cain and Abel represent the age long tension between pastoralists and agriculturalists, which can be found in many instances .
Eg, the historical roots of the Rwanda genocide between Hutu and Tutsi is at heart such a conflict.
There is even a hint of it when Odysseus returns home to Ithaka from whom he gets help.

[Walker]

The knowledge of evil is good because with that knowledge then one knows that one is serving the wiley evil that so cleverly disguised itself as good.

So, if you store the text containing the knowledge on a computer, not only will the text itself be "good", but now the computer is also "good". So, there are "good" and "evil" computers. The ones that are "good" store a text with the definition of "good".

There are also "good" and "evil" rocks, because you can etch the definition of "good" onto some of them. Trees are also good and evil.

If you tattoo the definition of good and evil on your face, you also become "good".

Storing text on a computer is a physical action.
Tattooing your face is a physical action.
Trees are plants.

Knowledge, which is the topic, is not physical action.
Neither is knowledge a plant.

[Impenitent]

The knowledge of evil is good because with that knowledge then one knows that one is serving the wiley evil that so cleverly disguised itself as good.

So, if you store the text containing the knowledge on a computer, not only will the text itself be "good", but now the computer is also "good". So, there are "good" and "evil" computers. The ones that are "good" store a text with the definition of "good".

There are also "good" and "evil" rocks, because you can etch the definition of "good" onto some of them. Trees are also good and evil.

If you tattoo the definition of good and evil on your face, you also become "good".

Storing text on a computer is a physical action.
Tattooing your face is a physical action.
Trees are plants.

Knowledge, which is the topic, is not physical action.
Neither is knowledge a plant.

but Robert is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlNhD0oS5pk

-Imp

[Walker]

(continued)

You may ask, what is knowledge? (Feel free to tweak).

Knowledge is a type of understanding that recognizes the ordering of the universe, a recognition (not creation) most often occurring in human-bite-sized portions relevant within a closed system such as the ripe fruit of earth, teeming with life even in every scoop of its soil that's encased within and touching the semi-permiable, transparent, thin skin of climate.

Yeah. That’s the ticket.

[Walker]

but Robert is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlNhD0oS5pk

-Imp

Great performance!