The Story of Adam and Eve, Sexist, Egotistical and Guilt-Inducing

by sabastious 32 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  sabastious

  Put yourself in the mind of an ignorant early human. He can speak, he can understand his surroundings and can even chart the stars in the night sky.

  One other thing this man can understand is injustice: When bad things happen to people who didn’t do anything to deserve them.

  How does this man reconcile these things in his mind? I believe that the story of Adam and Eve was written to solve this mystery.

  Why do fires come and burn down his huts? Why do animals come and kill his young? Why did his son get sick and die?

  We, as humans, have a need to explain rationally why these things occur. One explanation is that we DID something to deserve these atrocities, and it must have been something bad.

  Enter the story of Adam and Eve, a story of why bad things happen to good people. Sin. A fairly straight forward and juvenile understanding of the concept of Justice.

  Why do woman have such a seemingly harder existence than men? They have pain in their abdomen and bleed for 1 week out of each moth. They have to endure massive pain and sometimes death during childbirth.

  The story of Adam and Eve explains why this is so. But it also has a side effect, it also justifies why men can dominate females.

  This story was written by a man and is for MEN. It perfectly explains why bad things happen to humans, a curse, and why even worse things befall woman, an even worse curse.

  Now we must apologize for living, and as men get to treat woman for the lesser humans that they are and the accursed.

  -Sab
• 

  loosie

  Amen!!!!
• 

  GreyWolf

  I doubt if your interpretation is correct. In the first place, the primary sinner was held to be Adam, not Eve. Eve was deceived; Adam was at fault because he knew better. St. Paul blames Adam (Romans 5:12), not Eve. However, as a side note, let me point out that the Western interpretation of the verse I have just cited is wrong. Augustine of Hippo didn't know Greek and misunderstood what St. Paul was trying to say. So Catholics, Protestants and JWs generally believe sin is passed down genetically, something the Eastern Churches don't buy. For a good discussion of this matter, see Elaine Pagels' book "Adam, Eve, and the Serpent.

  I regard the accounts of the Creation and and Fall as allegorical, but they are not simplistic in the way that many other ancient Creation/Fall stories are. Therefore, like C.S. Lewis, I take them very seriously. They explain a great deal about human nature.

  GreyWolf
• 

  Heaven

  The whole story is rather wacked. Snakes can talk? I don't buy it.
• 

  blondie

  *** w80 6/1 p. 29 The First Woman to Be Deceived ***Eve had not been left ill-equipped for making the right decision. She knew God’s law and had unmistakable evidence of her Creator’s love for her and her husband. So Eve should have concluded that there must have been a good reason behind God’s command and that it was in her best interests to obey. Besides, since her husband was one flesh with her, it would have been only right that she first consult him about this matter.

  Sadly, however, Eve had apparently failed to develop the needed appreciation for her Maker to think positively about the divine command. The Bible record reports: "Consequently the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something to be longed for to the eyes, yes, the tree was desirable to look upon. So she began taking of its fruit and eating it." (Gen. 3:6a) In a spirit of independence, Eve chose to decide for herself what was good and what was bad instead of submitting to God’s decision in this. She was completely deceived by the lie spoken to her through the serpent. Thus, when partaking of the forbidden fruit, she did so in anticipation of bettering her condition.

  Eve lost no time in approaching her husband, intent on getting him to share with her in transgressing God’s law.

  Tragic consequences befell that first human pair. Eve had stepped out of her God-assigned role and had assumed the capacity of a teacher with reference to her husband.

  *** it-2 p. 1182 Wife ***After the sin, first of Eve, who instead of being a helper to her husband proved to be a temptress
• 

  mindmelda

  I do think a lot of myth is an attempt to explain natural events and the human condition, but it could be a bit more complicated than that, but the interpretation of Genesis of explaining the origin of sin, and hence, the human condition isn't a universal one.

  That's one way of looking at it, but even the idea of childbirth being painful and women getting the short end of the stick biologically speaking is definitely thought to be a mindset of patriarchal societies that tended to think of the feminine aspects of God or gods as inferior, and the warrior aspects as superior.

  Before the Bronze Age, there's evidence that female deities were considered at least equal to male, as women were more revered as life giving entities and the female gods as more vital.

  When humans in the middle east moved on to the more patriarchal modes, the warrior aspects became a lot more revered, and if you were a monotheist, you had to decide if the male or female aspect of God was more important, because you could no longer split God up into different individual aspects like polytheists can.

  At that time in the Middle East, warrior gods were a big deal as humans had moved into a very violent period of almost constant tribal warring. So, female aspects got kicked to the curb and bring on the thunder gods! They remain in small bits and pieces here and there, (like the female personification of wisdom in Proverbs and in some of the poetic expressions of Psalms) but mostly, it's Jehovah of Armies, a very warriorlike entity being revered by the Hebrews.

  People have been confused about whether the Biblical God is a touchy feely sympathetic, rather feminine God (Jesus was often portrayed as rather effeminate in Christian art of various periods) or the Warrior God, a very uber masculine aspect ever since.

  All reflections of humans themselves, really. Rather stereotypical reflections, as ultra nurturing femininity or violence glorifying uber masculinity.
• 

  sabastious

  In the first place, the primary sinner was held to be Adam, not Eve. Eve was deceived; Adam was at fault because he knew better. St. Paul blames Adam (Romans 5:12), not Eve.

  Eve was cursed twice over. First the human curse of death AND the female curse of painful birth pangs and such.

  I find it quite odd that you use Romans to make a point about the Genesis account.

  -Sab
• 

  designs

  How do you spell Allegory oh yeh ALLEGORY. If the Jewish people don't take it literally why do knuckle dragging Christian Fundamentalists.

  The problem is not in these old stories it is in how people read them...............
• 

  Doug Mason

  There are two Creation stories. The first, which was written by priests who called God by the name EL, was written with the intent of formalising the institution of the Sabbath. The parallel days (1-3 vs 2-6) shows that the climax is the Sabbath. That is all that the story was about. It was never meant to be taken literally.

  The second story was written by priests who called their God by name of YHWH. It is they who introduced the name ADAM, meaning ruddy, or of the earth. Their focus was the institution of marriage.

  The are conflicts between the two accounts but this did not bother the person who combined the stories at a later stage, probably after the Babylonian Captivity. The main thing was the purpose of each account; fables and myths are not expected to crawl on all fours, with details being irrelevant, simply there to enable the story to flow. (Same with parables).

  Doug
• 

  cameo-d

  Heaven: "The whole story is rather wacked. Snakes can talk? I don't buy it."

  Sure snakes can talk. You encounter them every week on stage at the KH.