The motives behind Genesis (and the rest of the Bible)

by DeWandelaar 6 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  DeWandelaar

  I was in thinking mode this morning and since I am writing a roman based on a part of the genesis account I suddenly came to a weird sort of motive of the writer of Genesis. Going beyond a blogpost of Adamah about the true meaning of the tree of knowledge I come to the following conclusion:

  The writer of Genesis wants to promote obedience at cost of knowledge

  Why?

  According to the Genesis account the male and female were created by Gods image (not totally though since they did not have the knowledge but that is a small inconsistency you need to get used to) according to the wellwritten blog of Adamah. Now something happens... the female wants to obtain the fruit of the tree. Now what was the fruit? Was it an apple or a pear? No... the fruit was "KNOWLEDGE" and "KNOWLEDGE" leaded to socalled SIN. Even TOUCHING it (or in case of knowledge TRYING to THINK) was lethal in the eyes of the writer.

  Now... before they ate from that fruit they aparently where doing quite simple tasks now didn't they? They had to take care of the garden and the animals and they had to breed in order to get the species called "mankind" to multiply. No thinking involved too much there. The writer of the Genesis-account is stating that that is paradise. Just doing what is said you should be doing... skip the thinking.

  Thinking further about that it is quite easy that the writer tries to discourage knowledge:According to the writer of Genesis KNOWLEDGE is the wedge between a beliefsystem in a DEITY and a beliefsystem WITHOUT a DEITY. It is the wedge that leads to destruction. That is at least what the writer is telling you.

  A beliefsystem based on a DEITY leads to obedience and slavery... slavery to men who point to the deity and their beliefsystem (aka known as religion). A beliefsystem based on knowledge skips the deity and therefore the slavery to other men. The last version is not the version a ruler or a person with an agenda wants to happen since it means they have no attachments to these people and can not lead to taking them captives of their "power".

  If we look further in the bible we see the same things:

  Samuel is talking about "Obedience above sacrifices"

  David is talking about that we are not able to follow our own footsteps

  Paul is suggesting that filosophy is not idle

  Etc etc etc.

  The whole bible and especially the writer(s) of the bible are suggesting obedience to a beliefsystem and it started at the Genesis-account.
• 

  Xanthippe

  Brilliant, I like it!

  I have also thought the thing about the tree of knowledge being of good and evil and giving them the realisation that they were naked is almost like a description of the development of sentience, sapience. Animals don't care if their genitals are visible and they have no sense of morality. What this means I do not know. Your theory is well developed, though.
• 

  Ruby456

  obedience to authority in order to discourage thinking is a great motive to focus on in the book of Genises and in the whole bible. well spotted dewandelaar. there are so many other motives that free thinkers focus on in Genesis rather than on OBEDIENCE but these lead to people being innovative and explorative. this is something that leaders who focus on asking for obedience do not want to encourage.
• 

  adamah

  Thanks for the mention of my article, DeWandelaar:

  http://awgue.weebly.com/the-paradox-of-adam-and-eve-and-how-the-new-world-translation-fruitlessly-attempts-to-keep-it-hidden.html

  My thinking is the writers of Genesis likely hijacked a common myth that also became the story of Pandora's Box in Greek mythology, where Pandora opened the box out of intellectual curiosity in order to gain knowledge (gnosis), where the only thing that remained inside was "hope" (Christianity reinserted "hope" into the tale, by reinterpreting the curse given to the serpent as foreshadowing Christ, the "hope".)

  The Hebrews valued not intellectual knowledge (of the World) like the Greeks did, but moral knowledge, the ability to decide what is evil vs good, what is right and wrong. There's no need to speculate on that point, since Genesis 3:6 TELLS us explicitly WHY Eve wanted to eat the fruit: to make her "wise". God admitted they were able to decide for themselves, with "their eyes having been opened".

  The story is a GREAT intro in a book of ancient legal code, explaining in narrative form WHY the listener of the tales needs to pay close attention: even overlooking the slightest detail can have devastating consequences, as it did for Adam and Eve. It's more or less the "intro" which cleverly combines a warning to pay attention with many "origins myths" (why humans die, etc).

  It's likely no accident that the second story encountered is a homicide case (Cain vs Abel): all the other cuneiform laws of the Ancient Near East (eg Code of Hammaurapi, etc) also began with homicide laws. Of course, the actual civil codes aren't given until later in Deuteronomy, but the stories gave the legal codes a life of their own which is often taken as literal history, when they were simply parables intended to explain how the Deuteronomic Code came about, and in fact is worthwhile obeying as if it was trying to sell itself.

  No... the fruit was "KNOWLEDGE" and "KNOWLEDGE" leaded to socalled SIN. Even TOUCHING it (or in case of knowledge TRYING to THINK) was lethal in the eyes of the writer.

  On that: Eve said she was not supposed to touch the fruit, but the God-given prohibition didn't mention not TOUCHING it, but only not to EAT it. I suspect Eve is made out to be a silly women prone to exaggeration, fitting in with the general tendency towards misogynism in the Bible.

  Adam
• 

  Apognophos

  I somewhat agree with the OP, but I think it misses the mark as far as the real message of the Garden of Eden tale. You have to logically ask what the "evil" was in the phrase "knowledge of good and evil" when the first and only immediate result of eating the fruit is that Adam and Eve became conscious of their sexuality and thus covered themselves up.

  When Adam and Eve didn't know they were naked, this was likely in reference to the mindset of a child. Children don't know they're doing anything wrong until adults start yelling at them to put on their clothes and teach them to be ashamed of nudity. Since the Jews stigmatized human sexuality more than their contemporaries, it would make sense if, in their creation myth, the original man and woman were sinless because they did not think about sex. They would reproduce, of course, but with no sinful thoughts in their minds -- more like empty-headed animals just fulfilling their instincts.

  It was when they began to have an unhealthy view of each other (a "craving" for the man, or a desire to "dominate" the woman), that they came to know evil.
• 

  prologos

  besides the profound explanations of Adamah,

  simple unanswered questions and inconsistencies that come from the later embellishments of the story can be fodder for spinning a tale on the trees, and under the trees. for example:

  Nothing in the story indicates that they understood to be exempt from normal death that they must have seen around them, or at least when peering over the fence.

  Eve's remarks (the touching part) indicate the idea of sudden, or same - day death. and the inability, or unwillingness of the deity to deliver on that threat?.

  Their normal life span (a thousand pre-flood years) could only be extended by the tree of life, and since we still carry A&E genes in us today, unsullied by that life tree's properties, we die, like EVERY other entity in the Cosmos.

  As a denouement you could of course somehow bring in that it is written by humans, with an agenda, not influenced by the advanced knowledge expected from communication of the creator. (if any).

  enjoy your creative writing, the ancients did.

  wandelaar you mentioned you are writing a "roman", fiction, a novel, roman not necessarily romantic but like roma, detached from the truth.

  well, like religions based on the story,

  you are writing fiction about fiction,

  fractals on the fine points. enjoy.
• 

  Separation of Powers

  I really appreciate the whole manipulation aspect of your theory. Belief systems have long been an amazing way to control people.

  My take on the whole thing: The Bible was written in an attempt to solidfy the Jewish nation. Every nation, when it becomes a nation, needs their history. They need their legends. I think about Guy Fawkes in the UK or Paul Revere in the US. Stories? Yeah, a little credibility, but ultimately, these stories serve to distinguish a people, to define their past and thus....their future.

  Genesis, the account of Adam and Eve, purpose: The Jews were blessed from the beginning, they had everything in that little garden. They were separate, distinct, they had a one-on-one relationship with the Creator. But, they blew it. Thus, the fall and man, the Jews, needed to return to their Creator, reestablish their kinship with God. (They were not alone in the world, afterall, where did Cain get his wife? Why was he SOOO worried about the stigma of having killed his brother and the thought that someone would strike him down? )

  The stories of Abraham and the patriarchs, the Founding Fathers of the Jewish state. This is where legends are born. God is in contact with each of them, they contend with God, they are blessed and chosen....Manifest Destiny if you will.

  The Mosaic Law: Now that you have a defined past and associated legends, you must CONTROL the people. This is where we both agree significantly. The Law, however, is not simply control. It is also an attempt at defining your difference, nation building, if you will. A man will fight to protect himself and his family, but of what good would it be to fight for a country unless he believes so firmly that his country is more than just some land, it is the REASON for his existence. The Mosaic Law does this by defining its prophet as THE prophet, such a prophet that good and evil, God and Satan, contend for the location of his final resting place!

  The Prophets: Revisionism at its finest, propaganda if you will. A Messianic theme that will ultimately end with the Jewish state in paradisaic conditions, i.e. where this all began in Eden.

  When the Old Testament is read with such a viewpoint, it takes on a completely different and yet understandable theme. It is a political gem, replete with nation building, genocide in the name of patriotism, manifest destiny....and, as you say, CONTROL.

  Just some thoughts,

  SOP