Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: what is the meaning of Genesis3, for real dough! (LONG!)
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 13:14:57 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:

>In article <sam.715443060@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>As a lead in, I'm hypothesizing here!  None of this should be construed to
>>reflect any particular position that I hold!  This is all idle speculation!
>>Ok, not so idle, but speculation none-the-less.

>Fair enough, all of this is speculation for speculations sake. My words may
>sound like attacks, but they are not, I'm only speculating also. Don't let
>my words fool you into thinking I know the answers.

Not at all...but I can't wait to write my next theology or philosophy paper...
;-)  It ought to set my profs right off. ;-)  Actually, I've got a history
class this semester (I'm what you might call a career student - I work to
support my school habit! ;-)) that is study evil throughout history.  This
ought to be great fodder for that, too!

>>The symbolism sort of depends on your view, eh?  If Original Sin is your
>>understanding, the symbolism is a lot different than say, Irrenean theology
>>which holds that we are created fallen and life is for education and
>>growth.

>Just for the record, I think OS is mostly a marketing gimick and I'm not a
>beleiver in the ends justify the means. 
Augustine et al had to come up with something like this, or else conclude
that God was directly responsible and to blame for all evil.  Free will is
a way of defending God against the charge that he's a real SOB, as Sean
Hartigan has put it.  Unfortunately, it has holes.

>But what about this idea of woman
>being created from man and thus symbolic of man leaving his father and
>mother and clinging to his wife so they are of one flesh? Who is Adams father?
>Does the same apply?

Looking at the story, and assuming the parable idea, God is portrayed as
Adam's father.  An insight I just had seems to say that it is never
possible to reach your full potential while living your life in your
father's house under his rules...you don't get the opportunity to think...
hmm...I think I'm starting to see what you're getting at.

>Yeah, and notice how God warns Adam of the Tree of Knowledge but says
>nothing of the Tree of Life. Why? This is a creation story right? But does
>the creation stop when Adam is created from dust, or when Eve is created
>from Adam, or when they eat the fruit, or when they get birthed or kicked
>out of the Garden, or is the creation still occuring today in us? When will
>the creation stop? Oh, and knowledge of good and evil in man causes a
>separation from God, yeah because this is human being stuff. God is
>transcendent of such a low level concept. This concept is for us to see the
>world. This is the creation of human being here, not God. In order for
>creation of something different, separation is required.

Well, this is interesting.  If the creation story is representing the quest
for knowledge and wisdom, then yes, 'creation' is still occuring today.
Everytime we learn something new or make a discovery, we are continuing the
act of creation.  Hmm.  Fascinating Captain!

>>Could the tree symbolize gaining knowledge of God?  In other words, by
>>gaining wisdom, we learn more and more about how God works.  The whole
>>story is turned on its head if one rejects the concept of Original Sin.

>Yeah, so why not reject the concept? Or make two models, one with and one
>without and see how they differ. What of instead of Original Sin you replace
>Original Sacred? If human being is only human being, then doesn't a judgement
>of relative goodness or badness not apply? Knowledge of good and bad, who is
>that for, to help who judge whom? Does God need this knowledge and help in
>judging? Is Original Sin or Original Sacred important for God? Have we
>really failed His plan? Are we really good or bad, in His eyes?

This is pretty much where Iraneaus went.  Granted, he was a very, very
Catholic Bishop, but he disagreed with later writers about the concepts
here.  He went for fallen creation and life being a quest for knowledge of
God and education...continuing even after death, until all souls were
reckoned with God.

Transitive Original Sin is a concept that I personally reject based on the
line in Romans "All men have sinned"...  Even Paul knew that we were
responsible for our own actions.

>>It doesn't appear that the Torah supports the concept of corruption of
>>blood for sin (ie generationally transmitted sin). This appears to be a
>>later construct, and Jeremiah relates God's plan to not hold the sin of the
>>fathers against the children.

>Um, not in Genesis but later in Mosaic-Law/Pentateuch, right? 
Even later...I corrected my comment...it should have been Jeremiah.

>And if creation is still occuring, if we are still consuming and reacting 
>to the fruit, how does this effect later constructs? Is time a judge of 
>value? Closer to the Garden or further away, good or bad?
Well, if life is a quest for knowledge and education, the farther from the
Garden (no knowledge) that we get, the better.  The trick is to properly
apply the knowledge (ie become 'wise').

>>Where does that leave this particular Biblical story?  So far, to me, it
>>seems more of an ex-post-facto reflection on reality than a description of
>>actual events.

>Does this matter either way? Are the two hard to tell apart?

Yeah, it actually does.  If the story is literal, then we have to take the
words as they are there.  That means that all of our speculation here is
wrong..;-)  (Not that it isn't anyway!)

Any properly constructed fiction must be less strange than truth!  In order
to be considered 'good', fiction must be believable.  Truth has no such
requirement!

>>It would appear to be the case, if we take the literal position.  But if we
>>examine it further, might not it be telling us that they were 'innocent'
>>just that they had not yet acquired a set of moral guidelines.  Look at
>>primative societies and the value they assigned life (low).  An eye for an
>>eye was moderate, compared to previous concepts.

>OK, a couple of ideas here. Primative societies may have assigned a higher
>value on total life. The big difference is the recognition of the individual.
>This is very modern European, ~12th century CE. Can you see how human sacrafice
>means something different if the smallest unit of identity is the tribe? But
>knowledge of the individual identity, is this good or bad, more
>enlightened or less, closer to Eden or farther?

I agree.  There is a trend in the opposite direction, at least in some
circles.  Back to the 'good of the tribe' as it were...environmentalism is
an example of denying individual rights/identity in favor of 'saving the
planet'.  [This is not meant as a flame, just as an observation.]

[My hypothesis about the serpent being externalized curiosity deleted]

>Perhaps this
>is the meaning of serpent, to aid or hinder man, depending on your good/bad
>judgement call, right? 
This would seem to fit what I said...if the serpent==curiosity and the
'fruit'==knowledge, the 'serpent' is doing exactly what is claimed -
helping man gain knowledge of good and evil...learning to make judgemnet
calls.

>Right, the fruit eating goes on even to today, doesn't it? Creation is not
>finished yet?
I agreed, more or less, with this above, given that 'fruit-eating' is
equated with seeking wisdom.

[Paul's Stuff about maintaining status quo deleted]
Well, that's a good question.  Paul (of Tarsus, not Harvey!) seems to think
so.  Or perhaps Paul had other motives.  I'll leave that for another
discussion.

Societal treatment of woman is evolving over time, based on situations we
find ourselves in.  Oftentimes, it is external events that force the hand
of society. (Industrial revolution, depression, WWII, etc).

>>>Did Adam and Eve have a choice? 
>>If we are talking parable here, there was no choice.  The events related here
>>are simply a way of explaining why things are the way they are and how they
>>got there.  The 'temptation' is actually curiosity.

>What does no choice do to Original Sin?

No choice == No original sin.  Putting everything right back in God's lap.
And if so, then it would seem to be impossible to conclude anything but
universal salvation, just as John Hick did.

[Discussion of Lucifer's fall deleted]
>How do we know that he has not reformed or is trying to aid man in following
>a different course? Do as I say, not as I did.
Well, I don't know what to say here.  Agreeing with you would be clear
heresy! ;-)  Not that that's stopped me before.  But I don't think this is
the case.  Leaving the NT out of it, the book of Job seems to leave Satan
in the role of 'prosecuting attorney'.  Not exactly the current concept of
the Devil, but not what you've said, either.  It's interesting how we went
from Satan in the book of Job (meeting with God on a regular basis) to the
Satan of today - nowhere near God...hmm.

>>I wonder where the talking snakes went?  Were they killed in the Flood? ;-)
>Maybe they are still here? ::B^}
Do you know any? ;-)

>>>If you were Adam or Eve, what would you have done? 
>>I could have done nothing else.  Human nature! ;-)  It is impossible to
>>avoid gaining knowledge or sinning.  Pick your way of understanding this,
>>it still doesn't change our reaction.  And done freely, too!  Because of
>>internal desires!

>Hmm, but the sinning thing? I keep triping on that. You know why.

Well that's the thing.  Sin is that which separates us from God, right?  So
then if knowledge brings us closer to God, and the symbolism of the story
is about knowledge, then there was no sin.  QED.

>>As you said, I let my imagination run away with me...;-)  How did I do?

>Pretty good, I think. At least I got some new ideas. All in all, it was
>a pleasurable fruit eating experience. I feel no guilt.

:-)  I agree...this was interesting, to say the least

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc