Back in the Garden

The story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden continues to weigh on my mind. I find it a little funny to be hung up so early in The Story, but here I am, questioning from the get-go. I'm pretty sure that having a proper understanding of this myth or parable will greatly influence how I read and understand the rest of the Bible. I have no doubt there are very profound truths about the human condition contained within this deceptively simple narrative. Although I am willing to admit that we are imperfect beings, I don't subscribe wholeheartedly to the doctrine of original sin as commonly understood.

In fact, from a certain perspective I don't consider The Fall of Man to be a rebellion or corruption at all, seeing it instead as a necessary step on the journey toward spiritual maturity. The garden story is the perfect example of ignorance being bliss. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the dawn of consciousness. At that point, man grew beyond his oneness with nature (was expelled from the garden) by becoming aware of right and wrong. He developed a conscience. Do animals feel shame? I don't think so. But from that point on, Adam and Eve felt vulnerability (nakedness) and shame.

Once man evolved beyond his animalistic instincts he developed the ability to consciously bring harm to himself and others. He was also able to use his mental powers to judge despite his errors in perception. Consciousness, or self-awareness, created the fundamental spiritual challenge: overcoming the temptation to serve and preserve oneself at the expense of others. In short, learning to love.

There's a similar perspective I learned through the writings of Emmet Fox and I can't tell you how true they ring. To me, it makes more sense than anything else I've heard up to this point. (These points are paraphrased for the most part.):

• Adam and Eve represent two aspects of the same person. Adam represents the physical body and Eve represents the mind.
• The serpent represents our lower nature -our carnal mind or ego (an aspect of Eve), thus it was Eve who the serpent tempted.
• Eve eats the fruit first because mind is the builder and body is the effect. The mind can bring harmony or trouble into the body/world but the body cannot act independent of the mind.
• When Eve ate the fruit (gave in to the temptations of the ego) she started to view herself as separate from God, this mistaken belief is the Fall of Man.
• When it says Eve shared the fruit with Adam, it represents those mistaken beliefs becoming manifested in the material world (acted out). (I guess you could call this sin!)
• The result of these mistaken beliefs is much suffering and effort. (Eve experiences pain in childbirth; Adam must till the ground.)
• A belief in separation from God also causes us to feel vulnerable and fearful, hence the feeling of nakedness Adam and Eve experienced and the desire to cover up that feeling with material things.

I don't know about you, but I find all this stuff absolutely fascinating. The Bible is an amazing, amazing book filled with truths beyond what we can even currently imagine. I really must spend more time reading and meditating on these inspired writings.

Can Christians Become Enlightened?

As much as I love the Christian path there is a mindset common among followers of Jesus that really disappoints me. I'm finding this a little hard to put into words so please bear with me. 

What I have observed is that very few Christians appear to work on their spiritual health in any practical way. Often, they genuinely want to change but instead of doing work to help themselves they choose to put their faith in God. It's as if they expect God to flick a switch and make them better people. 

Some Christians believe that incorporating certain practices not only demonstrates a lack of faith but is potentially dangerous. Personal development resources (books, programs, counseling, etc.) are often viewed with suspicion if not fear. There may be the outright rejection of any spiritual teaching that is not found in the Bible or even hints at New Thought. (Ironically, sometimes the Bible says the same thing but frames it differently!) Self-help books, yoga, meditation, body work, cognitive therapy and the likes are often dismissed entirely as being too new-agey and therefore risky business.

Many Christians are afraid to claim their own (God-given) power. Afraid to even admit they have any. I happen to believe God created us in His image, with the divine spark, and capable of greatness. Our animalistic nature (what many would call our fallen nature) is a considerable handicap but I won't allow it to be the defining characteristic of my being. I am a child of God first; a creature of this world second. Can we overcome the flesh? Jesus did. He received a glorified body in its place. What if that is what the resurrection was all about? The overcoming. What if Jesus' death on the cross was a symbolic message rather than a substitute punishment? What if we paid as much attention to the resurrection as we do the crucifixion? 

What if God can only give us new glorified bodies when we have freely surrendered our earthly ones for crucifixion?

It's almost like Christianity promotes this fatalistic thinking that we cannot fix ourselves, that we are broken beyond repair, and our only hope is that God will restore us after we die. Although there is some truth in this we are allowing it to have too much power over us. Yes, as long as we remain in this world, in these (unglorified) bodies, we will be tempted and we will stumble. But is that evidence that we belong on the ground? No, even Jesus stumbled on his way to the cross.

Don't get me wrong, I wholly believe we need to trust in God, just not in the believe now so he can fix us later kind of way. God leads but we must listen and follow his directions. He gives us strength and wisdom but we must do the work. God empowers us, here and now, to be healed, to be transformed, to become (dare I say it) enlightened! To me this is the most beautiful message of any teaching in any religion. We can be born again and made anew. Of course we never do it alone. Aloneness is an illusion. Our spiritual nature is intimately connected with its source; it cannot be disconnected any more than an estuary can be disconnected from the ocean. All that craves God comes from God and is God. Deep calls out to deep.

Jesus told us that the Kingdom of God is within and you know what? I believe him.

What do you think? Do Christians shirk spiritual work? Is the doctrine of original sin a self-limiting belief that prevents Christians from reaching their full potential?

Atheism: It Kind of Makes Sense

Why are we (Christians) so willing to let God off the hook when terrible things happen but give Him the credit when things go well? We see bad things happening to godly people all the time and even hear it described as God's will. (Yet, if it were anyone else who desired to see tragedy and suffering befall the innocent or defenseless we'd consider them sadistic psychopaths.)

The atheists are right. It doesn't add up.

One 'simple' but inadequate explanation: God gave us (humankind) free-will and we (Adam and Eve) chose to turn away from Him (sin) so now we live in a fallen (imperfect) world (because that one sin was actually a gateway sin that opened the door for an evil disease to infect all life) and He (being the gentleman He is) doesn't force His will on us so we are left to decide for ourselves if we want the cure. 

The cure consists of accepting/following Jesus, the only son of God, who was sent for us to kill as a perfect sacrifice so that the evil curse would be broken. There is a catch however, the curse is only broken for those who worship (the raised-from-the-dead but now invisible) Jesus and acknowledge what his death on the cross represented (a substitute death penalty because we all deserve to die).

But wait, even if we accept the cure we won't be immune to future infections. At least not in this world. Presently the cure can help, but it doesn't take full effect until the World to Come. Someday, probably long after we're dead, God is going to restore His Kingdom and everyone who accepted Jesus' cure will be healed of their sin-infestation forever.

So you see, God has a perfect plan to fix this big mess which is all our own fault to begin with. Get it? And yet I have to ask, if God really has the power to transform this war-torn world into a Kingdom of Paradise then what is He waiting for?

I guess the (typical) Christian response to Epicurus' questions is that God is both willing and able to prevent evil; just not yet and He won't do it for everybody.

Exploring the Garden

I don't believe in a literal interpretation of the Garden of Eden story in Genesis. I just cannot get past the talking snake. They don't even have the proper anatomy to make human speech sounds. Virgin birth? I can work with that. Talking snake? Not so much. I know there are many Christians who view the snake as a symbol for Satan's temptation or deception, but that's as far outside the box of literal interpretation as some people are willing to explore. To many, Adam and Eve were very real people and their story is a factual telling of how sin entered the world.

"The story epitomizes a psychodynamic in which progressive growth, with separation and individuation, of the young is experienced as perilous—not only to them, but also correspondingly to their procreators. In the myth, the increasing psychic and physical maturation of Adam and Eve produced a crisis. Not only was divine authority flouted, but also apprehensions were aroused that God might be humbled or diminished. This threatened him, evoking his wrath and leading to the punishment by abandonment of his youthful wards." (Marvin P. Osman)

I have to tell you, I find this myth to be one of the most exciting stories in the bible. I love to read it again and again and find new interpretations for it. It fuels something deep within. I can't understand why some people are so afraid to view the garden story as myth -as if that dismisses it as just another piece of fiction. Myths are so much more than that; they are powerful narratives meant to articulate very real, very deep truths. Creation stories are the most common form of myth found throughout history and culture.

“There is actually a historical explanation based on the coming of the Hebrew into Canaan and their subjugation of the people of Canaan. The principal divinity of the people of Canaan was the Goddess, and associated with the Goddess is the serpent. The serpent is the symbol of the mystery of life. The male-god-oriented group rejected it. In other words, there is a historical rejection of the Mother Goddess implied in the story of the Garden of Eden.” (Joseph Campbell)

In June a fellow blogger shared some of her thoughts on the subject and I've been hungry for more discussion ever since. I mean, even from the perspective of the most common Christian interpretation, it's still a very confusing story. For starters, I have to ask: didn't the snake tell the truth and God lie? God said Adam and Eve would die if they ate the fruit whereas the snake told them their eyes would be opened and they would be like God, knowing good and evil. I've had it explained to me that before the forbidden fruit was eaten  physical death was not a part of the human experience, but this explanation doesn't hold up when you consider God's words in verse 22: "Look, the human beings have become like us, knowing both good and evil. What if they reach out, take fruit from the tree of life, and eat it? Then they will live forever!" So the Lord God banished them from the Garden of Eden. They had not yet partaken of that fruit -they were destined for death even before eating from the Tree of Knowledge.

 

It seems to me that God never intended for Adam and Eve to live forever, and yet, that is exactly what He set out to accomplish by sending Jesus to us. Wouldn't it have been much easier to just let them eat the fruit? Or going back even further, create humans as eternal beings? And like my blogger friend said, why did He put the trees there in the first place if He didn't want them to eat the fruit? These are the problems I get into when I try to interpret the Bible as the inerrant or literal word of God. I'm much more inclined to receive the Bible as a collection of stories, historical and allegorical in which man tries to explain his  spiritual experiences. As a result of these stories, we are able to follow the evolution of man's relationship with God.

"And who is so foolish as to suppose that God, after the manner of a husbandman, planted a paradise in Eden, towards the east, and placed in it a tree of life, visible and palpable, so that one tasting of the fruit by the bodily teeth obtained life? And again, that one was a partaker of good and evil by masticating what was taken from the tree? And if God is said to walk in the paradise in the evening, and Adam to hide himself under a tree, I do not suppose that anyone doubts that these things figuratively indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place in appearance, and not literally." (Origin of Alexandria)

According to tradition Moses wrote Genesis. I wonder how he learned of the stories in Genesis that occurred long before his birth. Was it oral tradition handed down or did he receive the teachings as prophecy? I also wonder if the doctrine of the Fall of Man and original sin were always a part of Jewish teachings or if they are uniquely Christian. It's a fascinating topic I plan to continue researching.