Can Adam be held responsible?
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:18 am
To get the root of the question we must first establish some absolutes according to the document giving the account- the Bible.
1. Adam and Eve were the very first humans
2. Neither Adam nor Eve had the concept of Good and Evil before the fruit was eaten
3. They received the concept of good and evil from eating the fruit proven through the fact that they were ashamed of their own nakedness upon eating the fruit.
Genesis 2:18 (NAS) And Jehovah God said "It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him a help meet for him"
In Genesis 3:5 (NAS) For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened and they knew that they were naked and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons.
With these basics we can then continue our search for a reasonable answer. It is hard to do, but try to completely be objective and empathize with the concept of having no idea what is right or wrong. To envision a toddler would still be missing the mark we are aiming to achieve. A toddler does not know right from wrong on most things, but the difference in a toddler and Adam is that the toddler does have the basic sense of right and wrong. Ex: if she witnesses abuse, she cries.) It is upon that sense which a life of values will be built. Adam on the other hand, had NO basic sense of right or wrong whatsoever or else the tree of the knowledge of good and evil wouldn't be very enlightening now would it? So Adam, before he ate the fruit, was doomed to a lifetime of unaccountability because he could never build up morals and base his life around them. Adams existence was based on 3 things, food, water and procreation. Our lives are more complex than this primal man because of the fact that knowledge of what is good or evil plays a major role in the directions we take and the decisions we make.
If I was Adam, it would not matter to me that I was naked in a garden as long as I was comfortable with the weather. (which is exactly what we witness in the pages of this book) Comfort was the only factor that concerned Adam and Eve. When Adam had a desire, the thought was not: is the deed right or wrong, rather, where is it so I can commit the act that satisfies the desire. When a person is driven out of desire and primal instinct, rather than reasoning of good and evil they no longer fall into the category of what we think of as present day humans but instead become something all together different. Animals would be the best example, although I am quite sure that animals cannot accurately describe the state of absolutely no spark of knowledge of good and evil. Even monkeys will starve themselves if they realize that the button they push for food causes their cage mate to be shocked. **http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/scien ... ref=slogin **more evidence toward the evolution of emotions and intellect rather than divine endowment of them.
To get down to meat of the point, look at concrete definition of the word Lack.
lack [lak]
n
1. shortage or absence of something: a shortage or complete absence of a particular thing
Encarta World English Dictionary & (P) 1998-2004
If I make the statement I lack the sense of sight. Any rational human being would come to the conclusion, that if I am telling the truth, I have absolutely no vision whatsoever, none. That would be an absolute. If I told you I lack the concept of the knowledge of good and evil- First, you are going to ask when I am scheduled to go before the judge and make my insanity plea for murder and then after your fits of laughter or worry have subsided you are going to ask "Well, my good Sir, where did it go?" Because what I have told you is that I have NO concept of Good or Evil. My statement did not leave room for me to have any knowledge of the sense whatsoever, just as a man lacking his sense of sight has none at all. A statement such as Last night I had a lack of sleep is a different use of the word because that lends way to the fact that I have had some sleep it was just lacking the amount I want. To be blind from birth though is a different use of the word lack. To ask a man blind from birth to point out the color red in a box of crayons would be asking him to do a task that to anyone else is simple but to him impossible. Just as to ask a man who lacks the concept of good and evil to obey an order is just as silly, but easy to present day humans who do have the concept.
For God, to base the bible around the redemption of sin that started with Adam is in its very premise flawed. In the bible it states that Adam sinned when eating the fruit. To that statement I say does a lion sin when hunting down and devouring a wilder beast on the African plains? Even if I told a lion not to do so he still would without ever feeling an ounce of guilt at the blood dripping from his fangs, because in the lions mind he saw, he wanted, and he took. Just as Adam, when told not to eat of the tree by God then in turn was told that he should in fact eat of the tree by his wife which was told to do so by the talking serpent, and neither having the ability to decide from who is right or wrong (serpent, God, themselves) or more importantly even what is right or wrong, did end up eating of the fruit. By doing so he was satisfying primal desire and had no way of factoring in that he was breaking a law or sinning. Just as the blind man can not point out the color red if told to do so, even if his life is on the line. How can you hold a blind man, that you yourself created blind, accountable for not being able to choose the red crayon from a stack of crayons? Adam was guilty of nothing more than being what he was programmed to be: A man surviving by desire. Clearly stated in the scripture above, Eve was only using value judgments of the flesh when she saw that it was "good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise". None of which are moral judgments; for, as already established- neither Adam nor Eve had the luxury of a moral compass upon which to base their decisions. To hold either of them responsible for pains in child birth, sweat in the fields or the death of billions upon billions, is something to be balked at if not rejected all together.
In sincere concern for the Truth,
LRR
1. Adam and Eve were the very first humans
2. Neither Adam nor Eve had the concept of Good and Evil before the fruit was eaten
3. They received the concept of good and evil from eating the fruit proven through the fact that they were ashamed of their own nakedness upon eating the fruit.
Genesis 2:18 (NAS) And Jehovah God said "It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him a help meet for him"
In Genesis 3:5 (NAS) For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened and they knew that they were naked and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons.
With these basics we can then continue our search for a reasonable answer. It is hard to do, but try to completely be objective and empathize with the concept of having no idea what is right or wrong. To envision a toddler would still be missing the mark we are aiming to achieve. A toddler does not know right from wrong on most things, but the difference in a toddler and Adam is that the toddler does have the basic sense of right and wrong. Ex: if she witnesses abuse, she cries.) It is upon that sense which a life of values will be built. Adam on the other hand, had NO basic sense of right or wrong whatsoever or else the tree of the knowledge of good and evil wouldn't be very enlightening now would it? So Adam, before he ate the fruit, was doomed to a lifetime of unaccountability because he could never build up morals and base his life around them. Adams existence was based on 3 things, food, water and procreation. Our lives are more complex than this primal man because of the fact that knowledge of what is good or evil plays a major role in the directions we take and the decisions we make.
If I was Adam, it would not matter to me that I was naked in a garden as long as I was comfortable with the weather. (which is exactly what we witness in the pages of this book) Comfort was the only factor that concerned Adam and Eve. When Adam had a desire, the thought was not: is the deed right or wrong, rather, where is it so I can commit the act that satisfies the desire. When a person is driven out of desire and primal instinct, rather than reasoning of good and evil they no longer fall into the category of what we think of as present day humans but instead become something all together different. Animals would be the best example, although I am quite sure that animals cannot accurately describe the state of absolutely no spark of knowledge of good and evil. Even monkeys will starve themselves if they realize that the button they push for food causes their cage mate to be shocked. **http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/scien ... ref=slogin **more evidence toward the evolution of emotions and intellect rather than divine endowment of them.
To get down to meat of the point, look at concrete definition of the word Lack.
lack [lak]
n
1. shortage or absence of something: a shortage or complete absence of a particular thing
Encarta World English Dictionary & (P) 1998-2004
If I make the statement I lack the sense of sight. Any rational human being would come to the conclusion, that if I am telling the truth, I have absolutely no vision whatsoever, none. That would be an absolute. If I told you I lack the concept of the knowledge of good and evil- First, you are going to ask when I am scheduled to go before the judge and make my insanity plea for murder and then after your fits of laughter or worry have subsided you are going to ask "Well, my good Sir, where did it go?" Because what I have told you is that I have NO concept of Good or Evil. My statement did not leave room for me to have any knowledge of the sense whatsoever, just as a man lacking his sense of sight has none at all. A statement such as Last night I had a lack of sleep is a different use of the word because that lends way to the fact that I have had some sleep it was just lacking the amount I want. To be blind from birth though is a different use of the word lack. To ask a man blind from birth to point out the color red in a box of crayons would be asking him to do a task that to anyone else is simple but to him impossible. Just as to ask a man who lacks the concept of good and evil to obey an order is just as silly, but easy to present day humans who do have the concept.
For God, to base the bible around the redemption of sin that started with Adam is in its very premise flawed. In the bible it states that Adam sinned when eating the fruit. To that statement I say does a lion sin when hunting down and devouring a wilder beast on the African plains? Even if I told a lion not to do so he still would without ever feeling an ounce of guilt at the blood dripping from his fangs, because in the lions mind he saw, he wanted, and he took. Just as Adam, when told not to eat of the tree by God then in turn was told that he should in fact eat of the tree by his wife which was told to do so by the talking serpent, and neither having the ability to decide from who is right or wrong (serpent, God, themselves) or more importantly even what is right or wrong, did end up eating of the fruit. By doing so he was satisfying primal desire and had no way of factoring in that he was breaking a law or sinning. Just as the blind man can not point out the color red if told to do so, even if his life is on the line. How can you hold a blind man, that you yourself created blind, accountable for not being able to choose the red crayon from a stack of crayons? Adam was guilty of nothing more than being what he was programmed to be: A man surviving by desire. Clearly stated in the scripture above, Eve was only using value judgments of the flesh when she saw that it was "good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise". None of which are moral judgments; for, as already established- neither Adam nor Eve had the luxury of a moral compass upon which to base their decisions. To hold either of them responsible for pains in child birth, sweat in the fields or the death of billions upon billions, is something to be balked at if not rejected all together.
In sincere concern for the Truth,
LRR