Was it fair to kick Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden?

[kylixguru]

The Double Allegory of Creation


There are three stages for the account of Creation in Genesis: Two allegories and the Reality which the allegories point to: Man as the theme of Creation.


The first allegory in the Genesis account of Creation is in the letter of the account, and here abide the masses of religious people for taking the account at its face value. I mean, Adam and Eve in the Garden being provided by God with all their needs, being told what's allowed and forbidden in the Garden, being misled by the serpent into eating of a forbidden tree, and eventually being punished with different kinds of punishments respectively on all three of them, etc. Just literally as it is written.

The second allegory has still the same elements and God is still figured anthropomorphically, but the meaning of the actions and behaviour depicts a more logical version of what happened in the Garden. And here abide those who can think more logically, abbeit not in the archtype level of Reality. In this phase of the account of Creation in Genesis, after God created Adam and Eve, He granted them with freewill and expected to be served and sought after by them, but the thing was not working. God would have to search for them and that was not the right method. They would have to become proficient and leave the Garden in order to seek for God in terms of growing in knowledge out in the greater world.

Then, among the many fruit trees in the Garden, God planted a most beautiful of all the trees with fruits much more alluring, and right in the middle of the Garden, so that it would easily call their attention. It was the tree of knowledge. But it was not working. Then, God told them that the fruit of that tree was forbidden under penalty of death, but just in the hope that the warning would make them curious and go for it. It was not working either.

Nex, God doubled in Eve the emotion of curiosity so that she would go for it and entice Adam into eating of that tree. However, God had underestimated Eve's emotion of love. She had fallen in love with her man and she would never risk loosing him for no stupid fruit even if it looked the most appetitizing of all. Obviously, it didn't work.

The next step was to use the services of the serpent to persuade Eve that she had misunderstood the prohibition. That what would die in them was not themselves but their stupid innocence and naivete. Then, the serpent showed up on the very tree and somehow called for Eve's attention. As she approached, the dialogue started. To instigate the conversation, the serpent started with a question which surely would require an explanation. "Is it that you guys cannot eat from the trees in the Garden?" Bingo! Eve was locked in. The serpent got Eve to talk by explaining that only from the tree of knowledge, they were forbidden. "Why?" the serpent retortted. "Because we would die," she said. "Nonsense!" said the serpent. "You have misunderstood the whole thing. God meant to say that you two will become like gods, knowing good from evil."

Now, imagine, Eve must have thought, her man like a god! Without much ado, Eve reached for the fruit, ate it and told Adam that it was okay. Adam thought for a second and came to the conclusion that even if it was not okay, he would rather die with her beloved who had just enjoyed half of a fruit. Then he ate the other half and went on eating more. The serpent was right. They did not die. And the first knowledge they acquired was of how much they did not know. I mean, that they were naked, completely destitute of knowledge.

It didn't take too long for God to appear in the Garden to collect the fruit of His enterprise. It had finally happened what He wanted without His having to do anything against man's freewill. Then, He formally defined some punishments to everyone according to their nature anyway, and got them out of the Garden into the greater world out there, so that they would grow in knowledge by seeking for God, which would be the right method.

Now, the third phase or Reality, the account of Creation is supposed to point to. I mean, the Humanistic approach, which is the purpose of the double allegory. The riddle points to the three phases in the development of man: Childhood, adulthood, and old age. Here, only the enlightened with Philosophical training dwells. I mean, the Theist who is big enough not to let him or herself be intoxicated by blind faith. In this class we can find also Atheists and Agnostics but under the subclass of sarchasm for not being able to harmonize enlightenment with the conception of God free of anthropomorphism.

Childhood is understood by that phase in the Garden when God would have to provide man with everything. That's the phase when we are dependent on our parents or on others for all our needs. That's the phase of walking on our four legs.

Adulthood is applied to that time when man ate of the tree of knowledge and became conscious of himself. That's when we actually become an adult and responsible for our own actions. I mean, when we can stand on our own two legs, so to speak.

Regarding the phase of old age, the allegory of Creation does not go into details, but it's when we become dependent again on others, especailly our children to take care of us. I mean, the phase of walking on two legs and a cane.


Ben

Where does this interpretation come from?
Does this represent the Jewish take on things?

 

[Ben Masada]

Where does this interpretation come from?
Does this represent the Jewish take on things?

From the metaphorical interpretation of this Jewish mind. I mean, from my intellectual elaboration of the letter in the Torah. Not all Jews think alike. Some of them are still slaves of the letter.

 

[Ben Masada]

Adam & Eve did know that taking of that knowledge was wrong.

Gen 2And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen. 3But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

So as you can see, Eve knew she was wrong and purposely disobeyed Gog. So the punishment was just.

John 8:32
thecomforter.info

Please, take a look at my thead on the Double Allegory of Creation in post #200.

You tell me, is knowledge wrong? "The fear (love) of God is the beginning of knowledge, which only fools despise." (Prov. 1:7) Metaphoically the woman had taken God too seriously. She didn't realize that God's will was that they did eat of the tree of knowledge and acquired wisdom. And Eve did not purposefully disobey God. Disobeying God she was while she was procrastinating her trip to the tree of knowledge. It took the Serpent to explain to her what was the real will of God. Read the allegory in post #200 and you will have a much better idea of what I mean.

 

[kylixguru]

From the metaphorical interpretation of this Jewish mind.
I mean, from my intellectual elaboration of the letter in the Torah.
Not all Jews think alike.
Some of them are still slaves of the letter.

I consider this a confession that explains very clearly why you have made such a mess of things.
They actually still want to hold to what the Author of the Torah originally intended without injecting any of their own personal biases.

 

[reve]

It is quite likely that the first redman might be a genetic abnormality (ie caused by God') around 4000BC the date we are generally given for Adam. If not the first albino say then the first recorded by his descendants. His descendants were also burned red in the sun, or some with his gene were and the gene flourished by natural selection (or the way the Genghis Khan gene flourished). A man created and kept separate in the hope he would not be tempted by the indiginous population there at the time who used opium, cannabis and huge amounts of alcohol (Note the first pharaohs had tombs full of wine jars with seals around 3200BC and it is said burned red in the sun) trees to avoid. Later generations were also brought up in separation with uncut hair and special diet and you know them by other names. But after tasting the ware sold by some serpentine and possibly oversexed merchant the whole experiment was aborted. Or not but that is how one can interpret the tale in one stage. God is there is in nature and man likes to interfere.

 

[outhouse]

It is quite likely that the first redman might be a genetic abnormality (ie caused by God') around 4000BC the date we are generally given for Adam. If not the first albino say then the first recorded by his descendants. His descendants were also burned red in the sun, or some with his gene were and the gene flourished by natural selection (or the way the Genghis Khan gene flourished). A man created and kept separate in the hope he would not be tempted by the indiginous population there at the time who used opium, cannabis and huge amounts of alcohol (Note the first pharaohs had tombs full of wine jars with seals around 3200BC and it is said burned red in the sun) trees to avoid. Later generations were also brought up in separation with uncut hair and special diet and you know them by other names. But after tasting the ware sold by some serpentine and possibly oversexed merchant the whole experiment was aborted. Or not but that is how one can interpret the tale in one stage. God is there is in nature and man likes to interfere.

You didnt make one bit of sense at all with this post.

I cant tell whether its imagination or just an absurdity

homo sapiens have been on the planet for atleast 200,000 years, this is not up for debate.

 

[reve]

I do not doubt the antiquity of home sapiens. Genesis mentions them before Adam. I am just popinting out that Adam may have been albino. When Stanley was searching for Livingstone in africa he was taken to a white man who was in fact an albino. The Africans considered the albinos to be special. If Adam were an albino it would make a lot of sense genetically. Kept separate as I say above (Selah) like men like Samson and John the Baptist. Kept away from alcohol particularly, a special diet (locusts and honey perhaps or the manna magic mushrooms). No sense in my post. Not much sense in Genesis either unless one can read what was really going on in prerecorded history passed down orally. The thread asks about the justice of the expulsion. If you break your oath (perhaps of silence, or prayer, or non violence) you are expelled from your order (of monks or whatever you belong to). Obviously.

 

[reve]

Was it fair to kick out Adam and Eve? There is a modern dilemma which may provide the answer. Since we have an enormous brain but use only 10% it is strange nature did not shrink it, we could manage with a snake sized brain most of us. It is equivalent to having a powerful computer but limited programmes and no connectivity. Maybe Eden can be compared to a Broadband Paradise and now we are all disconnected. Perhaps not all - there are the prophets and religions and the many people who claim direct access to God and we are not fit to judge. But in this tale of the Garden is it fair to cut off their connection? It happens if you do not pay your bill. It happens when it is thought you may conspire against your government, as in Egypt today. It happens when you break the code of conduct and law. So on those grounds it is fair. The more compelling question in my mind is whether it is fair that we cannot get back in who would not have eaten the apple or listened to the snake. Job came many years later. And it would seem that testing (tempting) someone, or torturing them, is used by the angels to see if someone is fit to get back to Nirvana or wherever. But they tried with Job and he remained faithful is the moral of that tale, the tempter working directly for God. As both stories were written down at roughly the same time it is fair to assume that both tempters may be in league with God. If you cannot resist temptation you will be cut off. A record for stealing some loose change will preclude you from any number of jobs, almost all here in fact. Adam is an accessory to this particular crime so he gets dismissed for gross misconduct. But what kind of world punishes the children for the karmic sins of the parents? (Ours)

 

[outhouse]

I am just popinting out that Adam may have been albino.

You dont have a clue about that its a bad guess at best, your imagination is close to the authors of genesis ill give you that.

There is a modern dilemma which may provide the answer.

Again your no where near reality and guessing, bad at that.

its not a dilemma at all