Where does one find…?

"I'm sure everyone except Anna and Craig realize this "warning" about Adam and Eve is just silly bantering, right?"

So let me summarize…

According to the story, man is alone in the perfect garden with all the perfect animals and everything is perfectly perfect except for the fact that he's alone and can't find a suitable partner/helper. So God makes this other person from the man while he sleeps…and man calls her "woman".

(Fascinating that, according to the story, woman was an afterthought to pachyderms, mites, and many other crawly things…)

And then isn't it the woman that eats the fruit, ruins everything BIG TIME, because she can't control herself? But if that isn't enough, she must go and tempt the man into eating the fruit as well, leading to the fall of the entire human race and our sinful nature forevermore…

….Nahhh, you're right. No sexist overtones here. It's all in good humor and in the name of "silly bantering".

Craig,

What part of silly is still eluding you?

You mean it didn't happen?

I was seriously beginning to worry people thought this was true.

Good gawd!! My parents were born in the same city — their distant forebears hail from two provinces right next door to each other. Boring…. :)

Boring? No. I'd say it's rich in a stand-in-place-and-see-where-you-are kind of way. It's got more depth than my background. Far deeper roots. You can talk about details and connections that I've never had. There is also a sense of stability and assurance that us neo-nomads just don't have.

"You mean it didn't happen?"

What? The biblical story of 'Adam and Eve' as historical fact? Doh! Ever heard of fable? Metaphor?

I mean I'm unsubscribing from this post to give my inbox a break. ;p

>Scratch Idaho then. And Alaska too.

+1!!

I stand corrected!

So it's simply sexist metaphor, not history.

Craig:

It was willful silliness on my part — nothing more and nothing less. :)

(But the warning is still valid. Vadim, pay heed!!)

No hard feelings, I know your words are tongue in cheek, Ben…

But I don't think we can say the same for the Bible, can we?

"It's got more depth than my background. Far deeper roots. You can talk about details and connections that I've never had. There is also a sense of stability and assurance that us neo-nomads just don't have."

Actually, no. WWII and Communism wiped it all out. My dad's family was extremely tight knit for generations — we have published genealogies going back to the 1200's! But the last 60 years, we are all scattered. Our extensive family compound which used to house hundreds is now just hotel, office and residential blocks. :(

You mean it didn't happen?

What I find so strange about the Judeo-Christian creation myth is where the men who told the stories got their experience with the women around them. I mean, in my own experience most women tend to be far more responsible, far more reasonable and earnest, far less "tempted" to cheat on their partners, and far less surprised and embarrassed about what goes on between men and women. I'm sure the women in biblical times were just the same. So what women were the storytellers thinking about???

Furthermore, how ungrateful can those storytellers have been to start the world off with men and not give credit to mothers who gave us all life? It's a very quirky cosmology.

"But I don't think we can say the same for the Bible, can we?"

Methinks the Bible is the Bible. It's how we interpret and apply the Bible to our lives — both individually and collectively — that determine its effect on our world.

I, for example, used the creation story as tongue-in-cheek humor. But in all seriousness, the ancient writer who thought up this story (we as Christians believe he was inspired) — wrote a brilliant piece. Sexist? Sure. Historic fact? Heck, no! But as a fable / metaphor to convey a deeper message of just who we are? It's brilliant!!

And the attitudes expressed in that story will become a deeply ingrained part of Western consciousness forevermore…

The Nineteenth Ammendment of the U.S. Constitution:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

…only 1,920 years after Jesus do we take a first step.

Actually, no. WWII and Communism wiped it all out. My dad's family was extremely tight knit for generations — we have published genealogies going back to the 1200's! But the last 60 years, we are all scattered. Our extensive family compound which used to house hundreds is now just hotel, office and residential blocks. :(

But it is my contention that culture and continuity are in the daily human interaction, and that the depth comes from being with each other, rather than the things we own. So, seen in that way, your background is rich indeed, Ben. Even if you are scattered, you at least know about your past. In my family the diaspora has lasted so long that there is no longer any memory of where we come from and who we were. Even my last name, "Arboleda", was forcibly given to the Filipino side of the family by the Spanish… it has nothing to do with our true family connection. My grandmother's last name was "Driesen", the name of a Jewish Frenchman slave-owner who played around with his slaves, with my great-great grandmother (yep, Jews had slaves!). No idea what came before that.

The diasporas of the world are ruining family lives and building a new way of seeing the world, don't you think?

Craig:

Forgive me if I misunderstand your post above. You seem to think that it is because of the bible story that held women to second-class status?

I don't see it that way at all. We are all products of our society. The ancient story teller had to paint a scene to start his story. Women were secondary and were expected to be subservient back then. The bible didn't cause it.

Proof: If the bible cause/prolonged women's second class status, then what about all the other major societies that weren't "tainted" by the bible? China? India? Aztec Empire? Inca? Maya? To different degrees at different times and places, they were all male dominated — and it wasn't because of the bible.

Miguel:

Yes, you have made a good point there! At least I still know my past. But that past — so recent we could almost still taste it — is no more. A raw wound hurts more than an old one.

Your post is absolutely correct Ben.

It wasn't the Bible- it was society.

As much as the Adam and Eve story talks about who "we" are, it also presents a pretty clear idea of what women are.

But it sure as hell doesn't aid the cause of women's rights to create a God that is easily interpreted as being in man's corner.

Men already had a million tools to assert dominance and exploited every one of them to the fullest…perhaps God was another tool thrown in for good measure.

"Men already had a million tools to assert dominance and exploited every one of them to the fullest…perhaps God was another tool thrown in for good measure."

Correct. If it had been the other way around, few people will buy and read the bible. The household purse was held by men generally. And then the underlying message of who we are and where our salvation is to come will not have reached very many. God speaks to us in our own terms.

We should get a beer sometime, I think the conversation would be fun.

Don't worry, I'm not an angry drunk :)

Aye!

You should get together for a beer sometime. Make the meeting someplace above 10,000 feet elevation where the alcohol hits you harder. You will be cheaper drunks that way.

–B.G.–

So drunk we forget that we are supposed to be helping and advising poor Vadim how to find a wife! :)

I won't claim this to be a permanent foolproof method…

I went on a Sierra Club dayhike. After midway, there was this gal bouncing along the trail without fatigue. I asked her what her major outdoor pasttimes were.

She said, "Oh, backpacking and cross country skiing."

I just about fell over, and we were happy for some years after that.

–B.G.–

Bob:

I hate to sound so negative and defeatist, but these days, Sierra Club day hikers are mostly old geezers… :)