An interesting take on the Genesis story

[sharkboarder]

Hi, wasn’t sure where to put this since I’m new to this forum, but it’s pretty interesting…

I’m a student and in class we’re studying a very interesting philosophical book called “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn. I wonder if anyone has read it before? Well, it’s basically about what humankind thinks of itself and how humans place themselves in the world. Basically, according to the story, “civilized” humans have an ongoing “mythology” that they are the masters of the universe and that everything is for people to use.

The most interesting part of the book, though, was when a character presented his view on the Adam & Even story in Genesis. In the character’s view, the Genesis story is purely symbolic. Adam symbolizes the “civilized” human who desires knowledge and ruling of the world, which is why he wanted to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve is not a person but a symbol of “life” itself (because “Eve” means “life” or something). Adam is tempted not by a person, but by life, because humans desire knowledge to prolong their life. And the reason why God doesn’t want Adam to eat the fruit is because, by attaining knowledge and trying to rule the world, man will destroy himself (look at global warming, war, industrial revolution, all that stuff).

The story of Cain and Abel is also symbolic. Cain symbolizes “developed” human civilization while Abel symbolizes “undeveloped” and “uncivilized” humans (like tribal societies, etc.). We often hear of “civilized” people trying to civilize others while “uncivilized” people tend to keep to themselves. So, according to this book, the story of Cain and Abel is again about man trying to assert his power.

I thought this was an interesting take on the traditional stories. The book does a whole lot better explaining this theory than I do, so I recommend you check it out. Any thoughts, comments? God bless =)

 

[mattkubes]

It’s a bit of an odd, nihilistic premise from the sounds of it. Does he propose that krill are actually our overlords? Simple observation and common sense places mankind as masters and stewards of creation.

The denial of an original set of parents is incompatible with the doctrine of Original Sin and was specifically ruled out in Humani generis.

In other words, it sounds like heretical nonsense.

 

[James924]

Hi, wasn’t sure where to put this since I’m new to this forum, but it’s pretty interesting…

I’m a student and in class we’re studying a very interesting philosophical book called “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn. I wonder if anyone has read it before? Well, it’s basically about what humankind thinks of itself and how humans place themselves in the world. Basically, according to the story, “civilized” humans have an ongoing “mythology” that they are the masters of the universe and that everything is for people to use.

The most interesting part of the book, though, was when a character presented his view on the Adam & Even story in Genesis. In the character’s view, the Genesis story is purely symbolic. Adam symbolizes the “civilized” human who desires knowledge and ruling of the world, which is why he wanted to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve is not a person but a symbol of “life” itself (because “Eve” means “life” or something). Adam is tempted not by a person, but by life, because humans desire knowledge to prolong their life. And the reason why God doesn’t want Adam to eat the fruit is because, by attaining knowledge and trying to rule the world, man will destroy himself (look at global warming, war, industrial revolution, all that stuff).

The story of Cain and Abel is also symbolic. Cain symbolizes “developed” human civilization while Abel symbolizes “undeveloped” and “uncivilized” humans (like tribal societies, etc.). We often hear of “civilized” people trying to civilize others while “uncivilized” people tend to keep to themselves. So, according to this book, the story of Cain and Abel is again about man trying to assert his power.

I thought this was an interesting take on the traditional stories. The book does a whole lot better explaining this theory than I do, so I recommend you check it out. Any thoughts, comments? God bless =)

It doesn’t sound any more or less silly than most of the garbage I used to read when I was an atheist and then agnostic and then pluralist etc. I recommend you read some von Hildebrand as these childish themes you mentioned in this book are not new or original, and he does a good job analyzing them.

 

[Crumpy]

These are allegorical interpretations of the creation account in Genesis.

The “scholars” tend to describe the creation account as a myth – not fiction, but an embellished story of the origins of a people. It is a ‘genre’ in itself of how such things were described in ancient literature.

Genesis embodies the position of faith that God actively intervenes in human life. Genesis creation is demythologized in the sense that it takes away all god-like qualities from animals and idols – those are simply other created or fashioned things.

I have to journey deeply into scholarly works that describe the poetic form of the first creation account in Genesis. It has the poetic elements of repetition (like a lot, you know?) and a motif of passing time (a week). One author describes it as like an overture to the story of Genesis.

It establishes (no kidding or subtlety here) that the Sabbath was an element or characteristic of creation itself, not an an afterthought. Note that when the sabbath is captured in the ten commandments, it is spoken of as already existing. The first creation account is considered to be a product of the “priestly” source used in Genesis and other books of the Torah (first five books of the Bible, as a first approximation). As so, it has that liturgical quality to it – the poetic level of discourse I mentioned above.

Poetry is the most formal voice of exposition in the Bible, with prose being the next lower level of voice. Those are more formal than the way people express themselves in ordinary everyday speech.

So, yes, poetry sweeps us away from the banality of everyday speech, and hints at majesty, purpose, structure, etc. and allegory – meaning which is beyond the ordinary or that which is immediately obvious.

(I’m not an academic, I’m just throwing around ideas that I’ve come across in reading.)

Yes, you could write a term paper on how Cain and Abel typify family conflicts that arise later in the Bible, recalling the Bible’s view that all people are ultimately part of one family.

 

[edwest2]

Hi, wasn’t sure where to put this since I’m new to this forum, but it’s pretty interesting…

I’m a student and in class we’re studying a very interesting philosophical book called “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn. I wonder if anyone has read it before? Well, it’s basically about what humankind thinks of itself and how humans place themselves in the world. Basically, according to the story, “civilized” humans have an ongoing “mythology” that they are the masters of the universe and that everything is for people to use.

The most interesting part of the book, though, was when a character presented his view on the Adam & Even story in Genesis. In the character’s view, the Genesis story is purely symbolic. Adam symbolizes the “civilized” human who desires knowledge and ruling of the world, which is why he wanted to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve is not a person but a symbol of “life” itself (because “Eve” means “life” or something). Adam is tempted not by a person, but by life, because humans desire knowledge to prolong their life. And the reason why God doesn’t want Adam to eat the fruit is because, by attaining knowledge and trying to rule the world, man will destroy himself (look at global warming, war, industrial revolution, all that stuff).

The story of Cain and Abel is also symbolic. Cain symbolizes “developed” human civilization while Abel symbolizes “undeveloped” and “uncivilized” humans (like tribal societies, etc.). We often hear of “civilized” people trying to civilize others while “uncivilized” people tend to keep to themselves. So, according to this book, the story of Cain and Abel is again about man trying to assert his power.

I thought this was an interesting take on the traditional stories. The book does a whole lot better explaining this theory than I do, so I recommend you check it out. Any thoughts, comments? God bless =)

"Adam and Eve: Real People

"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

I"n this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

“The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).”

Source: Catholic Answers library.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Crumpy]

The temptation of purely secular writers or non-Christian writers is to de-value the Bible. One of the ways of doing that is by showing how similar it is to other ordinary human works.

Judeo-Christian belief is that even though the Bible is written in the language of mankind, that it is inspired and so is different, radically different from other kinds of writing.

You’re “stuck” with your classroom reading, assignments, and lecturer. You don’t have to press the point of inspiration.

The similarity of Biblical writing to other writing and the differences from other writings are categories of ways to understand more clearly the message of the Bible. There’s nothing wrong with comparing them. But, we shouldn’t lose our bearings about what we’re talking about.

Some say that even opening the Bible with a preconception that it is inspired is a bias, of sorts. The alternate view or the response to that, is that is the way to best understand what the Bible says and how it was written.

 

[rom422]

Hi, wasn’t sure where to put this since I’m new to this forum, but it’s pretty interesting…

I’m a student and in class we’re studying a very interesting philosophical book called “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn. I wonder if anyone has read it before? Well, it’s basically about what humankind thinks of itself and how humans place themselves in the world. Basically, according to the story, “civilized” humans have an ongoing “mythology” that they are the masters of the universe and that everything is for people to use.

The most interesting part of the book, though, was when a character presented his view on the Adam & Even story in Genesis. In the character’s view, the Genesis story is purely symbolic. Adam symbolizes the “civilized” human who desires knowledge and ruling of the world, which is why he wanted to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve is not a person but a symbol of “life” itself (because “Eve” means “life” or something). Adam is tempted not by a person, but by life, because humans desire knowledge to prolong their life. And the reason why God doesn’t want Adam to eat the fruit is because, by attaining knowledge and trying to rule the world, man will destroy himself (look at global warming, war, industrial revolution, all that stuff).

The story of Cain and Abel is also symbolic. Cain symbolizes “developed” human civilization while Abel symbolizes “undeveloped” and “uncivilized” humans (like tribal societies, etc.). We often hear of “civilized” people trying to civilize others while “uncivilized” people tend to keep to themselves. So, according to this book, the story of Cain and Abel is again about man trying to assert his power.

I thought this was an interesting take on the traditional stories. The book does a whole lot better explaining this theory than I do, so I recommend you check it out. Any thoughts, comments? God bless =)

This is just another attempt by some author to reduce Holy Scripture to nothing but mythology, symbols or allegory. The account of Adam and Eve, for example, may contain allegorical details. But, although it is written in popular rather than scientific language, and although it uses concepts and style peculiar to the Hebrew mind, it is still substantially a factual account of how we fell from a state of initial justice to a state of sin. So, be careful how you interpret the Bible. It does not stand on the same footing as other historical or literary works. The books of the Bible are inspired writings, which means that their ultimate Author is the Holy Spirit.

 

[holmj2674]

Re-imagining the Genesis account was a notable characteristic of the Gnostic heresies of the early Christian centuries. Adam, Eve, Cain, Able, and Seth all take fundamentally different roles in these accounts and it sounds like this is a modern twist along the same vein.
In effect the Serpent is the good guy, waking Eve to true knowledge, hence a “spiritual” person was “feminine” whether actually male or female. Cain represents the Carnal person, while Able represents the “psychic” person who believes on faith and not personal divine revelation (Gnosis). Seth, Adam and Eves third child, becomes the precursor for Christ as a fully integrated personality (depending on Valentinian or Sethian cosmogony). I’ll add this is a very simplified explanation.
I have had several agnostic friends tell me they would love to hear my thought on this book, but I have not yet read it.

 

[cjck625]

Worldtophandbags.com supply the cheap louis vuitton handbags and other replica has a variety of cheap louis vuitton handbagscollections of replicas and you may always find a luxury one that can catch your eyes.

Look at the professional Louis Vuitton bags provided on our website, the most popular and cheapest, latest Louis Vuitton 2011 in the world. louis vuitton saleOur shop is a leading world-wide wholesaler company.We provided here with the best quality at an affordable price

They are famous for exceptional top quality technologies and a innovative range of sunglasses. But referring to the one, oakley sunglassesthe price is very high, some of us can not afford it, so fake Oakleys are you the best choice

mens jackets,mens jeans,mens sweaters,moncler jackets,cheap north face jackets are famous cheap oakley sunglassesfor exceptional top quality technologies and a innovation

It is possible to protect your eyes from harmful UV rays while still looking fashionable with a pair of cool sun oakley prescription sunglassesOver exposure to harmful UV rays can be momentarily uncomfortable and permanently harmful.

 

[James924]

Worldtophandbags.com supply the cheap louis vuitton handbags and other replica has a variety of cheap louis vuitton handbagscollections of replicas and you may always find a luxury one that can catch your eyes.

Look at the professional Louis Vuitton bags provided on our website, the most popular and cheapest, latest Louis Vuitton 2011 in the world. louis vuitton saleOur shop is a leading world-wide wholesaler company.We provided here with the best quality at an affordable price

They are famous for exceptional top quality technologies and a innovative range of sunglasses. But referring to the one, oakley sunglassesthe price is very high, some of us can not afford it, so fake Oakleys are you the best choice

mens jackets,mens jeans,mens sweaters,moncler jackets,cheap north face jackets are famous cheap oakley sunglassesfor exceptional top quality technologies and a innovation

It is possible to protect your eyes from harmful UV rays while still looking fashionable with a pair of cool sun oakley prescription sunglassesOver exposure to harmful UV rays can be momentarily uncomfortable and permanently harmful.

That makes about as much sense as the rubbish in the OP…