As in Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal asked Jodi to go back to the begginning.
If the sin was knowing the difference between good and evil to become like God, is that the curse we should reverse?
It's all good.
Back to the begginning.
Our bodies are not temples and infact defieled from enlightenment.
LOL think on it.
2007-03-22 10:25:02 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
ours is not to reason why
our's is but to do and die
2007-03-22 10:34:33 · answer #1 · answered by jj raider 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The great sin in the story of the Genesis is not knowing the difference between good and evil, but grasping to possess what is not offered to us. As to why what the trees represent was forbidden is a great mystery, but it may be that humanity had to be prepared to receive this knoweldge, because without preparation to receive the difference between good and evil, from a wisom and knowledge higher than our own, we often become confused and mistake good for evil and evil for good. Exactly what happens in the story from Genesis.
The other lesson in the story is that the paradise that was given, and then lost, is no longer ours, and we have to make our way in a world of ambiguity, where the crucible of good and evil, humanity's choice in the garden, is now the world as it is. It is futile to think that we can restore that paradise or return to a primordial state of being where we are "beyond" good or evil.
One more thing-- Aren't the main characters in "Silence of the Lambs" Hannibal and Clarisse-- who is Jodi?
2007-03-22 10:42:21 · answer #2 · answered by Timaeus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i am not sure what you mean, but presuming that sin was knowing the difference between good and evil. i dont think thats a curse that should be reversed no. i think the best thing that came out of the bible was jesus. and didnt he die for our sins? if we went back to the beginning then there would be no sin, we would all be living in southern iraq in the hanging gardens of babylon (which are now largley distroyed by the way).
but really i dont get the connection with silence of the lambs. isnt it sinning in itself to watch violence on the telly. did god want us to see that? i certainly dont watch it, cos it makes me feel yucky. plus there are nicer things to watch like fluffy bunnies and chicks just hatched etc.
i dont really have a clue what you are on about, but.....i dont mind adding my opinion.
2007-03-22 11:01:58 · answer #3 · answered by kt_sub2000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the sin was that they tried to get the same knolwedge that god had (they ate from the tree of knowledge); they tried to get their hands on some forbidden information and that was their sin.
But why should we "purge" ourselves of this drive? If we do, then we would be accepting/admitting to our subjegation by the Father.
To say that we're "defiled" by enlightenment - the obtainment of new information about our world- is a little paternalistic if whoever is saying is trying to keep information from you. And it's a sign of having internalized one's subjegation if the person saying it is the one being kept from having the info. they are seeking. Hope this makes sense.
2007-03-22 10:55:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Go back and reread Genesis. The sin was disobeying God and seeking to become his equal. Therefore, the original sin was pride. If there is any way you can purge the human race of pride, more power to you.
2007-03-22 10:33:59 · answer #5 · answered by Sharon M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The possibility for evil comes with the possibility for good; both come with freedom. Going back to the beginning would be going back to the state of consciousness of an animal, without the freedom that is gained by having a self-regarding ego ("ego" in the philosophical sense, the thing referred to by the pronoun "I").
___If you went back to that beginning, you wouldn't have the awareness to see any benefit. You'd be without sin, but you'd also be without any of the conscious awareness of yourself moving through your experience that you have now.
___No evil, but no good either; only neutral experience without any perceived value, only functional pleasure and pain.
2007-03-22 10:40:59 · answer #6 · answered by G-zilla 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Without evil can their be good. Therefore if you go back and reverse sin. There will be nothing.
2007-03-22 10:42:00 · answer #7 · answered by joe s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here is a question for you... Is there even evil and good or are they the same? Is it true that it depends on the point of view an action is percieved upon? ie: The holocaust... Death, pain, loss,...or.. gain of knowlege, streingth, ability to reconize and prevent?
2007-03-22 11:24:05 · answer #8 · answered by KRISTE 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with what my predecessors said. It all sounds logical to me.
This is in response to Timaeus.... Jodi Foster played Clarisse in the movie.... dumb*ss...
2007-03-22 11:40:34 · answer #9 · answered by Dee 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Transcendental longings existential bliss
2007-03-22 11:14:35 · answer #10 · answered by pathc22 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋