DIVINITY AND MANKIND

What if mankind really is divine?
By "divine," I mean having the innate capacity to do whatever mankind wants to do, and to live, though not forever, at least for those hundreds of years, as did the old patriarchs in Bible mythology.
The Bible speaks of Methuselah living to be 969 years old, outliving Adam, the "first man," by 39 years. Seth attained 912. Noah lived 950 years and Shem, 600 years, it says.
Still, hundreds of years of life is not eternal. When mankind was jointly building the Tower of Babel, their tongues were confused by God, it says in Genesis 11:6-7, lest they be able to do anything they plan. This fear that God had of mankind is stated directly in Genesis 3:22-23, when Adam is cast out of the Garden of Eden: "God said, the man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand also and take from the tree of life and eat, and live forever. So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken."
Many people take the Bible literally. What people believe is no concern of mine. I have my own beliefs.
But, this piece is a supposition, not a belief, not my own proposition for anyone to do anything but to think.
This piece was prompted by an accumulation of things over the years from space exploration to climate change to fracking to racism to medical breakthroughs to food production, to a very broad panoply of many everyday things, including this hand-held mobile device, on which I am now writing!
If mankind were divine, would that new conception of itself alter life on earth for the good of our species?
That is the question. Since it is true that religious conceptions all carry with them moral strictures and structures that were designed by their priesthoods and wise to keep mankind from savagery, from wild animal-like behavior in theory.
With wars raging all around us and within us, without ceasing, one may well wonder to what extent these noble religious sages succeeded?
One may well wonder whether a new or another--whether "new" or not--conception of mankind might be preferable to what now exists, using the "life on earth" quality standard to measure; using mankind's relationship to itself and to its planet, Earth as the gauge?
Or, whether it might be best to rest and to realize that life is struggle, whatever one's religion or beliefs, as nature itself so ably attests daily.
Saturday, August 27, 2016
DIVINITY AND MANKIND
DIVINITY AND MANKIND

What if mankind really is divine?
By "divine," I mean having the innate capacity to do whatever mankind wants to do, and to live, though not forever, at least for those hundreds of years, as did the old patriarchs in Bible mythology.
The Bible speaks of Methuselah living to be 969 years old, outliving Adam, the "first man," by 39 years. Seth attained 912. Noah lived 950 years and Shem, 600 years, it says.
Still, hundreds of years of life is not eternal. When mankind was jointly building the Tower of Babel, their tongues were confused by God, it says in Genesis 11:6-7, lest they be able to do anything they plan. This fear that God had of mankind is stated directly in Genesis 3:22-23, when Adam is cast out of the Garden of Eden: "God said, the man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand also and take from the tree of life and eat, and live forever. So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken."
Many people take the Bible literally. What people believe is no concern of mine. I have my own beliefs.
But, this piece is a supposition, not a belief, not my own proposition for anyone to do anything but to think.
This piece was prompted by an accumulation of things over the years from space exploration to climate change to fracking to racism to medical breakthroughs to food production, to a very broad panoply of many everyday things, including this hand-held mobile device, on which I am now writing!
If mankind were divine, would that new conception of itself alter life on earth for the good of our species?
That is the question. Since it is true that religious conceptions all carry with them moral strictures and structures that were designed by their priesthoods and wise to keep mankind from savagery, from wild animal-like behavior in theory.
With wars raging all around us and within us, without ceasing, one may well wonder to what extent these noble religious sages succeeded?
One may well wonder whether a new or another--whether "new" or not--conception of mankind might be preferable to what now exists, using the "life on earth" quality standard to measure; using mankind's relationship to itself and to its planet, Earth as the gauge?
Or, whether it might be best to rest and to realize that life is struggle, whatever one's religion or beliefs, as nature itself so ably attests daily.
