The story of Creation is a culturally powerful piece of Christian culture, and it sets up a profound worldview for Christians worldwide. It completely flies in the face of what we know about morality. In order to behave morally, one must first be able to distinguish the difference between right and wrong and must willfully intend to commit an action. The same is true for behaving immorally; one must know the difference between right and wrong and they must willfully intend to commit an action in order to be morally culpable. For that reason alone, the story of the Garden of Eden should be challenged in Christianity. And theologians aren’t the only ones critically analyzing the Judeo-Christian story of creation. So when scientists start to peel back the layers of the story and reveal that one of the most cherished creation stories might not be in the strictest sense probable, it seems to upset a great many people. But so what? I know that the novel Ulysses is fictional, but that doesn’t mean that the story weaved by James Joyce is any less captivating. (And I do not want to draw out a discussion between the major works of Joyce and the major works of Christianity not because I don’t think this is a fertile topic for discussion, but because I think James Joyce has quite a bit to say about his own religion in those major works, and I’ll let his work speak for itself…)
The anger and resentment expressed by some Christians over this ‘revelation’ from science is uncalled for; just because science doesn’t support Biblical history doesn’t mean that one can’t love the drama and intrigue that comes with one of the world’s first soap operas. Since when has religion been so sensitive to scientific discovery? Many if not all stories in the Bible can be explained by modern science, but what makes religion so powerful (and arguably dangerous) is that it’s not concerned with how the universe works so much as how we should act within a universe created by God. What separates religion from moral philosophy is that religion deals with the supernatural, and if one’s religion were truly based on a supernatural foundation, no amount of scientific hole-poking should be able to knock it down. So when one’s belief system is based solely on faith in the absence of evidence, it’s no wonder that if one questions the evidence, naturally, some find the whole system in want of something more.
Very well written post. I agree with your view more or less. I have asked some of these same questions before though. How could one worldly sin be such an abomination to God? How could one small act have such drastic consequences for the entire human race? It seems unfair. It definitely doesn’t seem to be the work of a loving God who would send His son to save us.
I also like how you touched upon the classic “I don’t know, it’s God’s will” answer given by many Christians. I’ve often wondered if religion stacks the deck against its demise by merely using excuses like that.
I realized it was “Forbidden” by God, and that Satan lured Eve to taste it anyway… but why would it have been forbidden?
Without the knowedge and self awareness it granted, humankind wouldn’t have existed. Adam and Eve wouldn’t have reproduced, we would never feel the urge to invent or create… we would never have been sent out of the Garden that kept us dumb with perpetual happiness, never facing challenges or learning from our mistakes…
From what I know of the story, it seems to me that the apple granted us our humanity, otherwise we would, as a species, be little more than two beings endlessly wandering about, not doing anything constructive. We wouldn’t have any character, or a diversity of emotion… we’d simply exist. And smile…
To me the apple was more of a blessing than anything else, unlocking the possibilities of humankind.
I am an Atheist, but I’m interested in the philosophy of religion. The stories and their meanings are interesting.
Your thoughts?
The sense that I get with the moral of the story of the Garden of Eden is that our “urge to invent or create” leads to our collective downfall. I think that the story of Eden as I have interpreted it and how it has been explained to me throughout the years seems to suggest that the apple was not a blessing. We didn’t need to toil for all eternity on account of the sins of our oldest ancestors.
An infinitely wise God could have recognized that Adam and Eve didn’t know what they were doing. But God cast out Adam and Eve from paradise for their singular transgression. And worse still, according to Christian dogma, we still have to pay for their transgressions to this day.
The story of the forbidden fruit reminds me of cultures that practiced ritual sacrifice, by condemning an innocent person to death, the hope was to curry favor with God (or the Gods) for a good harvest, or a victory on the battlefield etc. We know that this practice is pointless nonetheless barbaric because murdering an innocent person will not change the weather.
And so the idea of condemning all of humanity for something we didn’t even do is just as pointless and barbaric. Holding us responsible for the sins of our primeval ancestors who have long since died is immoral. I have a hard time trying to justify this as a blessing.
This story is disturbing to me because this is the kind of morality that serves as the basis for Christianity. It teaches Christians that God thinks it is okay for someone else to pay for your sins; that it’s okay to punish someone who lacks the capacity to tell right from wrong and who had no intention to willfully commit any wrongdoing in the first place.
I think that our sentience, the very thing that makes us human, is special, but it shouldn’t have come with such a high cost, not if God truly is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good.