What, if anything, can be more important than knowledge?
To your last. You are aware that there was no garden of Eden. Right?
Regards
DL
Wisdom? Love? Hope? Faith?
And of course there was a Garden of Eden. Whether it was a place on Earth, or a place in a story – that’s another question. 
Sonia
All those “Wisdom? Love? Hope? Faith?” are all based on knowledge.
Knowledge must come first before any of the others can be actualized.
Wisdom uses knowledge to determine wisdom, love must have the knowledge od who to love and why, hope for whatever you have knowledge of and faith without facts is for fools.
Knowledge is key to all mental processes.
Regards
DL
I had a great link that would likely have convinced you that Eden was based on real gardens but the BBC pulled it for some reason.
I hate when they do that with decent information.
Regards
DL
Was that the one with the sultry presenter who looked like she’s just stepped out of the Song of Solomon? 
If it was I saw it.
Lovely Avatar Kate 
youtube.com/watch?v=Ne1wIEG … kEpuxmDSOl
I am not sure of her description but she pops up as first clip on this link. Be quick to look as it moves quick enough.
She also did a good job on a clip on Goddesses.
Regards
DL
I think it must be the four part documentary by the sceptical scholar on the Old Testament. Now I see the Garden of Eden as a symbolic and profound story - to take is as literal is problematic because it dies a death by a thousand cuts in the attempt at making all the literal details fit together. And a hard fundamentalist reading of Genesis 2 - which some her hold to because this is an evangelical site - is a new thing in the Christian Church. I try and stay out of the fundamentalism debate these days because it causes so much grief here when it gets going. Cerintaly you can believe the literal truth of the Eden narrative and still be an absolute bustard - and the contrary is also true.
BBC I player didn’t; pull those documentaries because they are too controversial. They were taken down at some stage because the programmes are only on there for a limited among of time. This sultry academic said lots of interesting things about historical context of biblical texts. A lot of what she had to say were her own hypotheses rather than fact (as is often the case with history -especially the earlier it gets and the more fragmentary the evidence is - but this was pop history). I seem to remember that she claimed that the Garden of Eden was a real Enclosed Garden owned by a priest King of Israel (and that Adam was originally seen as a Priest King). The garden of this priest king was modelled on the horticultural extravaganzas of the Babylonians (and later the Muslims did the same in North Africa and Andalusia)). The King was deposed - perhaps he was the King who ruled at the time of the Babylonian’s conquest - and thus was exiled from the Garden. Well that’s a hypothesis - I think the story is far older actually, but as a symbol is could well have taken on resonances of the Babylonian Exile - yes why not. But there was nothing amazing in what she said and she patronised her audience by assuming that they were religious fundamentalists to be given a lecture by pretty nanny (and there are very few fundamentalists in the UK). She was also extremely annoying in the way she sometime started or ended her lectures by sitting in a place of worship with worship in process and then turning to the camera and saying ‘And I don’t agree’ (because I am so very clever and so poutingly gorgeous?). Hmmmm - I had fun doing impersonation of her for a bit Of course if it wasn’t her you must forgive my folly. Oh I’ve just checked - it was her
I doubt that the BBC would kowtow to religious pressure and any broadcaster loves controversy as it brings the ratings up.
But who can say. They might have an Christian on the board with power.
I liked her work as it put things like Temple prostitutes and the life in a city state with finite resources into focus.
Even child sacrifice is dealt with intelligently.
Regards
DL
Hi DL - I wonder what she’d make of Girard’s thesis abbot child sacrifice and indeed human sacrifice that I find most compelling. I can’t remember what she had to say about Temple Prostitution.
All the best
Dick
As an aside, I always wondered if the first temple prostitute was a man or a woman. I think it may have been a man as in that day, men looked to men for real love and wives were more like chattel.
Regards
DL
Blood flow is the key to all mental processes. 
I would contend that while knowledge may be a necessary component of those things, that doesn’t raise it above them. You could say that air is more important than knowledge, because without air we’re all dead. Or maybe it’s the sun that’s most important. Life probably trumps knowledge, because if you can’t know anything without first being alive.
The possession of knowledge is not as important as how we choose to use our knowledge.
Sonia
GB,
If you’d trouble yourself to read carefully what I actually wrote, you’d see that while I do believe that knowledge is vital, I maintain that it is not all-important. The SOURCE of the knowledge (not its own self AS knowledge) is the thing that’s up for judgment in the Garden Myth. Our Father desires to teach us knowledge in a context of love and in company with wisdom, peace, joy, and delight. Rather than choose to imbibe His offered life, and through the life, the knowledge, we (as a race) chose and continue to choose, the knowledge all unclothed with the gracious wisdom and love of our all-knowing Father’s tutelage. And how could He be BUT all-knowing, as it was He who created all there is to know ABOUT?
What is the result of this oh-so-unfortunate choice? The vastest portion of our poor understanding (which we are so gauche as to label “knowledge”) is the knowledge gained of necessity by and/or as a result of the prosecution of warfare. Yes today we have hosts of scientists pursuing knowledge for its own sake, but progress in this world has historically come about as the need for the development of better weapons, better stratagems, better logistics, better skills, better defenses, better preparation for attacking and defending, for offering or meeting violent incursions by enemies. So no, I do NOT believe knowledge is supreme. It SHOULD be a wonderful servant and tool, and if we had taken it from the mouth of our wise and loving Father, it would have been just that. Instead we preferred our own beggarly cleverness. Woe is upon us for that disastrous decision.
And please refrain from patronizing me. If you’d been reading the things I’ve written to you here and elsewhere, you ought to have known that I see the Garden Narrative as sacred myth – the best kind of container for the sort of truth we’re unable to take in quite so well by any other means.
All those “Wisdom? Love? Hope? Faith?” are all based on knowledge.
Knowledge must come first before any of the others can be actualized.
Wisdom uses knowledge to determine wisdom, love must have the knowledge od who to love and why, hope for whatever you have knowledge of and faith without facts is for fools.
Knowledge is key to all mental processes.
Regards
DL
Blood flow is the key to all mental processes.
I would contend that while knowledge may be a necessary component of those things, that doesn’t raise it above them. You could say that air is more important than knowledge, because without air we’re all dead. Or maybe it’s the sun that’s most important. Life probably trumps knowledge, because if you can’t know anything without first being alive.
The possession of knowledge is not as important as how we choose to use our knowledge.
Sonia
True but you need it first before you can do something with it or develop the wisdom to know where to apply what bit of knowledge.
Nice deflection but you cannot hide that you have lost this round my dear. A wise woman would take that knowledge and recant.
Regards
DL
You call it all a myth, which would include the creator part and yet you seem to believe in the supernatural creator. Are you into woo or reality?
My view of God is as a man just as Jesus indicates it is as a part of his good news message.
youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbes … r_embedded
What is your God if not a man and why do you believe, by hearsay alone, that he can do woo?
Regards
DL
Who said knowledge is of primary importance? What sort of knowledge? Are we talking about technical know how, science, history, practical wisdom here DL? NO you are talking about deep insight into the nature and ground of reality. Well a lot of this knowledge come from realising how limited we are surely. Socrates was said to be wise because he knew the limits of his knowledge - a way of unknowing is part and parcel of true knowing. And we do learn and attain wisdom through loving. Love is about relationship - its about responding to the needs of the other. If we remain in the shell of self regard we may memorise a library or two but will have actually learnt nothing of importance. For Christian’s loving relationship is grounded in God’s love for us as revealed in Christ. Part of the ‘knowledge’ that is love’ is to understand that there is a part of the person we love which will remain a mystery to us.
I think you’re claiming victory a little too quickly.
You still have not convinced me that knowledge is the most important thing. It is important, but I think other things are more so. However, we may be at an impasse on this point.
Sonia
Hmmm - that’s a tad patronising 
No kidding, Dick. Patronizingness (especially against someone as kind and patient as Sonja) seriously raises my hackles.
GB said (to me)
Um . . . would someone like to translate? Even if this is just a run-on sentence, I’m not sure there’s enough “information” here for me to even comment on.
Well I’m befuddled too Cinders; lovely to touch base with you - and hope all is well dear Friend
In Christ our Hen
Dick
Kate,
I totally like the conclusion made that Heaven is a practical matter of living like Christ now.
I think Heaven is a gradual process that consists of the Christlike goodness in us and in the world in improvement over time. Unfortunately, because the world is very corrupt, the world won’t become heavenly until Jesus recreates it. The process of becoming more heavenly now is three steps: justification, sanctification, and glorification. Most Christians are stuck in sanctification. Few throughout history become saints (immediately glorified at Christ’s return). And many churches seem to just focus on justification, thus they focus on an otherworldly heaven where they will be renewed there. If the three-step process of purification to become more like Jesus is true, then a gradual process seems to beget a more honest sense of heaven. Personally, I’m still being sanctified and therefore I am living a little bit up to my potential of being glorified in “heaven”. Whether we go ‘out there’ or in some non-dimensional form of existence (spiritual) it doesn’t really seem to make strong use of the process of being glorified. The physical resurrection of the dead happens for the saints but they stay on earth. Even after everyone has been saved and glorified, there is no apparent need to ‘escape’ physically. The Bible assures me that “‘all flesh shall come to worship before me’, says the Lord.” Isaiah 66:23 Every person will physically be able to exalt the Lord indicating heaven is on earth.
I think I read somewhere on this discussion about the mansions in heaven. Someone mentioned that the mansions are symbolic of the roles the overcomers play in ‘judging’ the earth. I agree but I also think there is a double meaning. The mansions… well, could literally be mansions for the overcomers to live in. John the revelator could have seen both a inward and outward form of mansions and the whole heavenly realm.