From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: some gods are _not_ creaters of all things, apparently
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<BtLvHF.Cs6@nntp-sc.Intel.COM>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 07:10:12 GMT

In article <adams.714663184@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
But, at the same time as they were expelled, God promised Eve that her
'seed' would bring on a savior to redeem mankind.

Yeah, WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT? Is this just some more creationist science
boosh*t unsupported by scripture or is this just devine revelation received 
by you personally? Or did you hear this on one of those Fundy/Evilgelical
fund raising TV shows? Or is this from the book that proves the Earth is
flat?

In article <adams.714837075@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>From a paper I wrote for a theology class:

>I. In the Beginning: The Edenic Covenant
>   What is Genesis trying to tell us in the story of creation found in
>verses 1:1-2:3?  The events described demonstrate God's direct action in
>creation of the universe, and man with it.  Clearly, the intent of the
>redactor is to establish the Sovereignty of God and His control over all
>creation.  It also explains and justifies God's right to do as He pleases
>with His creation.  This conclusion is inescapable irrespective of whether
>or not we take a literal view of creation.

Ah, why is it important to conclude that the Lord can do as he pleases
with us? Is this to prove that He really is a warrior brut? Obviously,
if He created us, He could just as easily uncreate us. Why is it
important to stress this ability to ph*ck us over? Wouldn't a loving God
take a kindler, more gentler approach?

>   Similarly, the story of Adam and Eve found in Genesis 2:4ff shows us
>that even given only one rule, man is not able to keep it.  Declaring the
>literalness of the story would do nothing to improve the message found
>there.

I don't come to that conclusion at all. Obviously it was a setup. Who
wouldn't eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge, even if it meant
knowledge of the reality of life and death? Now, it seems to me there
are two possibilities. One, the guy really is a ruthless tyrant war
lord, or two, it was His intent for human beings to gain knowledge at
their own initiative, thus illustrating that with knowledge also comes
responsibility. Knowledge tells you that if you eat the fruit, it is
your responsibility, not some one else's. You can't get just good
knowledge, knowledge comes with good and bad. If you were just created
with knowledge, you could blame the bad on the creator. But you were not
created with knowledge, you gained it of your own initiative. It was the
first test, and you passed. You proved that you are willing to take on
some of your own responsibilities. That is proof that you are maturing
and ready to leave the nest. The creator had high expectations of you,
after all, in whose image were you created? Surely you don't expect Him
to do everything for you, do you? Did your own father and mother? You
didn't expect to stay in your mother's womb forever, did you? She drove
you out when she judged you to be ready, just as the Lord drove Adam and
Eve out of Eden when He judged them to be ready.

>God establishes Adam in the Garden, a symbol for the state of
>perfection.

Perfection? I don't know about that. Didn't you once find your mother's
womb to be perfection? Times change you know. There is only one
constant, and that is change. I would not call a lack of the knowledge
of life and death perfection. Would you? Are you ashamed of the
knowledge you have attained at your own initiative? Why? Are you ashamed
to know that you must kill in order to eat, that you must kill other
lives in order that you can live? Why? Why are you ashamed of
knowledge? You are proud of your knowledge of good, right? Then why are
you ashamed of the knowledge of evil that comes with it?

>The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil symbolizes mans' free
>will, and the Tree of Life symbolizes the promise of eternal life, finally
>fulfilled in Jesus Christ.  

The Tree of Life symbolizes something to aspire to, something to think
about now that you have knowledge. It is a bit more complicated than
hearing of the story of Jesus Christ, but no big deal. I've figured it
out. If I can, you can also. Use your knowledge and think about it. It
was on your initiative that you partook of the fruit of the tree of
knowledge. It must also be on your initiative that you solve the meaning
of the tree of life. If you know the reason for death, then you will
know the way of eternal life.

>Once violated, this state of perfection will
>not again exist until the end times (Rev 21).

Well, this is a different issue, maybe we'll discuss it sometime.

>God gives Adam total freedom (Gen. 2:15-17), with but one limitation.

And Adam correctly understood that any limitation was of His/his own doing.
Think about it. In whose image where we created?

>It is in light of the violation
>of this limitation and following Adam and Eve's rebellion against God that
>God establishes a covenant with Eve.

I don't see this covenant that you talk about. As far as I can tell, the
first covenant or deal is between Noah and the Lord.

>   We find this covenant in the conversation between God and the serpent
>where God tells the serpent that
>        "(15)...I will put enmity between you and the woman, and
>        between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head,
>        and you will strike his heel." (Gen 2, NIV)

This seems to me to be just a simple explanation of our strange
relationship with snakes. It is also a not so subtle jab at pagan
religions which see a great deal of power in the snake. It is the snake
that sheds it's skin and is born again. This does not fit the typical
Biblical Covenant. It seems to me that you are looking for something
that just is not there. The fact that others before you may have done
the same thing does not make it any more valid.

>This antagonism is used to symbolize the struggle between good and evil,
>played out in human history.  The promise is fulfilled in Christ's
>suffering and victory over death and Satan, in which we all will eventually
>share.  Paul makes a clear allusion to the promise in his comment that
>"...the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet"  (Rom 16:20,NIV).
>See also Gal 3:19-20.

That seems like a gigantic leap of blind faith unsupported by any
scripture. Don't go blaming the snake or Eve or Satan for your troubles.
It is you who ate the fruit. Take a little self-responsibility for once.
See if you can aspire to the image you were created in. Or as the
patriarchal one himself would probably say, be a man, not a snake!