RE: An argument against Adam and Eve
July 31, 2011 at 10:16 am
(This post was last modified: July 31, 2011 at 11:14 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Garden of Eden, S Africa? Adam, Eve, Bushfolk? No, of course not. This story doesn't have to conform to reality. Notice that one gripe is about whether the serpent was a snake, not whether or not serpents can speak. Those who accept this narrative as anything other than fiction have drawn a very deep line in the sand about what is fantasy and what is reality. Reality is not allowed inside this story. Reality stems from this story, but is otherwise unconnected. Some of our christians will argue that it is allegorical, metaphoric, or my favorite "you know nothing about purpose", however, it has to be literal, it must have actually happened. If it did not, we are not fallen.
I actually enjoy the genesis narrative quite a bit. In just this first chapter the original story teller went through the following:
Why are we here?
Where did we come from?
What is good to eat?
Why must we work?
Why do we feel pain and die?
Good questions, worth asking, and the narrator provides an answer to the best of his knowledge. In the end, how it all happened is irrelevant, the narrative serves to single out key points in the human experience at the time. This is a story, it is a good story (no matter what criticism you might level at it). It is not the sort of creation myth that modern christians believe it to be. It is the story of the origins and diverging path of one people, the god of one people. It makes no mention of where we all come from, only where the "hebrews" come from (who were these people that would kill Cain, why did he need the mark?). It also makes no mention of animals which were unknown to the culture, because they were not important. The very beginning of genesis only serves to bolster the claim that the god of the garden is the god of all. How, where, and why he created the people who were not hebrew is unimportant to the narrator, because they are not gods chosen people, nor would they have been the audience for this story. The modern believer should know this about the story, but usually does not. It leads to the unfortunate situation where the atheist criticizes the narrative on grounds that do not pertain to the narrative, all the while the believer defends it along the same grounds, believing it to be something that it clearly was never meant to be.
One of my favorite parts of Genesis, however, is the story of Cain and Abel. We can see the very beginning of a sort of elevation of the culture of the believers. Cain is a farmer, Abel a shepherd. The Lord prefers the offerings of the shepherd. It is tacit approval of the nomadic way of life. In the narrative, however we do see that these shepherds did credit Cain, and his agricultural way of life as establishing the first city. (This is taken from the Book of Jubilees "Lesser Genesis", well known to early christians, but thoroughly suppressed...nonetheless, it is part of the text of the dead sea scrolls) This is a wonderful narrative, expressing the pride that these early shepherds felt for their way of life, with the earliest cities as a comparison. They believed the cities to be filled with vice, and that the father of the cities was a murderer. The hills beyond the cities where filled with the good people, the shepherds, and The Lord looked kindly upon them. Whenever we make mention of the early hebrews as nomads, understand that they were not aimless wanderers, but shepherds, moving between natural feedlots and watering holes. They took pride in this "rural life" in the same way that people from the more familiar American Midwest do now. The theme of the righteous shepherd, the martyr, and wandering as punishment would continue throughout the entirety of the bible.
On the other hand, arguing over the scientific details of genesis is a bit like arguing over the luminosity of Rudolph's Nose.
"Well, speaking in the hypothetical, the average density of fog at the north pole would lead us to believe that"-scientist
"The song says Rudolph's nose was So Bright, the number is irrelevant, it was So Bright"-believer
"Just no"-non-believer
I actually enjoy the genesis narrative quite a bit. In just this first chapter the original story teller went through the following:
Why are we here?
Where did we come from?
What is good to eat?
Why must we work?
Why do we feel pain and die?
Good questions, worth asking, and the narrator provides an answer to the best of his knowledge. In the end, how it all happened is irrelevant, the narrative serves to single out key points in the human experience at the time. This is a story, it is a good story (no matter what criticism you might level at it). It is not the sort of creation myth that modern christians believe it to be. It is the story of the origins and diverging path of one people, the god of one people. It makes no mention of where we all come from, only where the "hebrews" come from (who were these people that would kill Cain, why did he need the mark?). It also makes no mention of animals which were unknown to the culture, because they were not important. The very beginning of genesis only serves to bolster the claim that the god of the garden is the god of all. How, where, and why he created the people who were not hebrew is unimportant to the narrator, because they are not gods chosen people, nor would they have been the audience for this story. The modern believer should know this about the story, but usually does not. It leads to the unfortunate situation where the atheist criticizes the narrative on grounds that do not pertain to the narrative, all the while the believer defends it along the same grounds, believing it to be something that it clearly was never meant to be.
One of my favorite parts of Genesis, however, is the story of Cain and Abel. We can see the very beginning of a sort of elevation of the culture of the believers. Cain is a farmer, Abel a shepherd. The Lord prefers the offerings of the shepherd. It is tacit approval of the nomadic way of life. In the narrative, however we do see that these shepherds did credit Cain, and his agricultural way of life as establishing the first city. (This is taken from the Book of Jubilees "Lesser Genesis", well known to early christians, but thoroughly suppressed...nonetheless, it is part of the text of the dead sea scrolls) This is a wonderful narrative, expressing the pride that these early shepherds felt for their way of life, with the earliest cities as a comparison. They believed the cities to be filled with vice, and that the father of the cities was a murderer. The hills beyond the cities where filled with the good people, the shepherds, and The Lord looked kindly upon them. Whenever we make mention of the early hebrews as nomads, understand that they were not aimless wanderers, but shepherds, moving between natural feedlots and watering holes. They took pride in this "rural life" in the same way that people from the more familiar American Midwest do now. The theme of the righteous shepherd, the martyr, and wandering as punishment would continue throughout the entirety of the bible.
On the other hand, arguing over the scientific details of genesis is a bit like arguing over the luminosity of Rudolph's Nose.
"Well, speaking in the hypothetical, the average density of fog at the north pole would lead us to believe that"-scientist
"The song says Rudolph's nose was So Bright, the number is irrelevant, it was So Bright"-believer
"Just no"-non-believer
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
