I have often thought about what knowledge of good and evil could possibly mean. Does knowledge of evil make us evil, for example. But recently it has occurred to me that “good and evil” could mean what is good happens and what is evil happens. “Knowledge” is the experience of that which happens that is good and that which happens that is bad. Such as is “fate” which happens. Our fate depends mostly on which ever path we choose, thus “choice” or “free will”. So, this fruit of the tree that grows, is it a good fruit or an evil fruit? A little of both?
Also, that we die. Maybe it’s a little about transparency too as the story goes that God gave them skins to cover their nakedness?
So, the first creation story explains the beginning of life on earth and the wonder and glory of it all. The second story explains death, fate, to look out for talking snakes; more human concerns about living and dying.
Jill_L said
I have often thought about what knowledge of good and evil could possibly mean. Does knowledge of evil make us evil, for example. But recently it has occurred to me that “good and evil” could mean what is good happens and what is evil happens. “Knowledge” is the experience of that which happens that is good and that which happens that is bad. Such as is “fate” which happens. Our fate depends mostly on which ever path we choose, thus “choice” or “free will”. So, this fruit of the tree that grows, is it a good fruit or an evil fruit? A little of both?Also, that we die. Maybe it’s a little about transparency too as the story goes that God gave them skins to cover their nakedness?
So, the first creation story explains the beginning of life on earth and the wonder and glory of it all. The second story explains death, fate, to look out for talking snakes; more human concerns about living and dying.
I shoulda knowed about talkin’ serpents before I met my ex.
I might maybe still own that dang double wide instead of just the mortgage on it.
CEJ said
Jill_L said
I have often thought about what knowledge of good and evil could possibly mean. Does knowledge of evil make us evil, for example. But recently it has occurred to me that “good and evil” could mean what is good happens and what is evil happens. “Knowledge” is the experience of that which happens that is good and that which happens that is bad. Such as is “fate” which happens. Our fate depends mostly on which ever path we choose, thus “choice” or “free will”. So, this fruit of the tree that grows, is it a good fruit or an evil fruit? A little of both?
Also, that we die. Maybe it’s a little about transparency too as the story goes that God gave them skins to cover their nakedness?
So, the first creation story explains the beginning of life on earth and the wonder and glory of it all. The second story explains death, fate, to look out for talking snakes; more human concerns about living and dying.
I shoulda knowed about talkin’ serpents before I met my ex.
I might maybe still own that dang double wide instead of just the mortgage on it.
Not really, RIGHT?? THAT WOULD be a curse!
A recurring misinterpretation of genesis 2-3 (often by xians) seems to be the exclusive focussing on the forbidden tree.
Humans are created by God (albeit in His image) same as all other living things in a garden with two special trees in the centre – that of knowledge of good and evil and tree of life. The humans eat of the forbidden tree, experience shame at their nakedness (wordplay in hebrew) and are given curses specific to their names (tilling the earth and pain in childbirth). Having eaten from this tree they are distinguished from the innocent remainder of creation. It is only when God fears that they might also eat from the tree of life (hitherto available to them) and become both morally mature and immortal “like us” (other deities? the angels?) that he expels them from the garden. So the narrative explains the descending hierarchies of created beings: the immortals, humans (mortal but with conscience) and the rest of mortal creation.
danceswithwombats said
A recurring misinterpretation of genesis 2-3 (often by xians) seems to be the exclusive focussing on the forbidden tree.Humans are created by God (albeit in His image) same as all other living things in a garden with two special trees in the centre – that of knowledge of good and evil and tree of life. The humans eat of the forbidden tree, experience shame at their nakedness (wordplay in hebrew) and are given curses specific to their names (tilling the earth and pain in childbirth). Having eaten from this tree they are distinguished from the innocent remainder of creation. It is only when God fears that they might also eat from the tree of life (hitherto available to them) and become both morally mature and immortal “like us” (other deities? the angels?) that he expels them from the garden. So the narrative explains the descending hierarchies of created beings: the immortals, humans (mortal but with conscience) and the rest of mortal creation.
Thank you danceswithwombats. I do appreciate your perspective. I’m am growing in my appreciation of the Hebrew language of the Bible. I go to Robert Alter’s translation often which I love, but even that is limited in what can be put into a printed book. I’ve actually never heard this point of view before.
Robert said
danceswithwombats said
… It is only when God fears that they might also eat from the tree of life (hitherto available to them) and become both morally mature and immortal “like us” (other deities? the angels?) that he expels them from the garden. …
One of my favorite images of God:
Gen. 3,22 Then the LORD God said, “See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man; and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim, and a sword flaming and turning to guard the way to the tree of life.
Reminds me of God being fearful of what the humans might accomplish at the Tower of Babel:
Gen 11,5 The LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which mortals had built. 6 And the LORD said, “Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.”
Did the authors really think God was so afraid of what people might accomplish, so fearful, insecure, and petty?
Or were some of these stories perhaps originally conceived of as children’s stories? As they are still used today? I remember carefully studying several children’s bibles before I first bought one to read to my kids. I wanted one that would capture the humor and imagination of some of these stories and, where necessary, I added my own reading of the Hebrew to make sure they understood that these were stories, just stories, even humorous stories at times. They laughed very hard at Jonah, the cartoon prophet.
Yes, they don’t seem to be describing an omniscient deity.
Jill_L said
danceswithwombats said
A recurring misinterpretation of genesis 2-3 (often by xians) seems to be the exclusive focussing on the forbidden tree.
Humans are created by God (albeit in His image) same as all other living things in a garden with two special trees in the centre – that of knowledge of good and evil and tree of life. The humans eat of the forbidden tree, experience shame at their nakedness (wordplay in hebrew) and are given curses specific to their names (tilling the earth and pain in childbirth). Having eaten from this tree they are distinguished from the innocent remainder of creation. It is only when God fears that they might also eat from the tree of life (hitherto available to them) and become both morally mature and immortal “like us” (other deities? the angels?) that he expels them from the garden. So the narrative explains the descending hierarchies of created beings: the immortals, humans (mortal but with conscience) and the rest of mortal creation.
Thank you danceswithwombats. I do appreciate your perspective. I’m am growing in my appreciation of the Hebrew language of the Bible. I go to Robert Alter’s translation often which I love, but even that is limited in what can be put into a printed book. I’ve actually never heard this point of view before.
Commentaries on genesis 2-3 will probably source Ezekiel 28 where there are same details: onyx and cherubs, plus lost innocence and expulsion.
Also compare Heracles’ 11th labour. En route he frees the titan Prometheus who had been punished for stealing knowledge (!) from the gods. (In other stories promotheus made humans from clay (!) and was father of Greek version of Noah.) Heracles achieves his labour by stealing fruit gifting immortality which are protected by a serpent/dragon in the garden of the hesperides by tricking a titan. The garden is specified as being in the far west of the ancient world (note that A&E go east of eden following expulsion.)
…they don’t seem to be describing an omniscient deity.
Yahweh is not the god of the medieval scholastics. He is a mythological deity like Zeus and Shiva. If anyone is interested in the biography of God here are some fine recent books.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by Theodore J Lewis
Prof Lewis is a critical scholar of the Ancient Near East on the faculty at Johns Hopkins U. This book was published by Oxford U Press in 2020 and has become an instant classic. It’s a survey of what we can know about the conception of God and the associated religious practice in ancient Israel. Frankly this book is all anyone will ever need on this subject for years.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by Francesca Stavrakopoulou
Prof Lewis’ book is a fat scholarly tome, dense with information. And pricey. For a more popular approach, less expensive and rather fun, though also based on firm scholarship, try this one. Dr Starakopoulou is on the faculty at Exeter in the UK. She is a constant presence on YouTube and reminds me of Dr Ehrman in a lot of ways, balancing scholarship (she has a fine monograph on child sacrifice in Ancient Israel) with the ability to write popular books.
Stephen said
…they don’t seem to be describing an omniscient deity.Yahweh is not the god of the medieval scholastics. He is a mythological deity like Zeus and Shiva. If anyone is interested in the biography of God here are some fine recent books.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by Theodore J Lewis
Prof Lewis is a critical scholar of the Ancient Near East on the faculty at Johns Hopkins U. This book was published by Oxford U Press in 2020 and has become an instant classic. It’s a survey of what we can know about the conception of God and the associated religious practice in ancient Israel. Frankly this book is all anyone will ever need on this subject for years.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by Francesca Stavrakopoulou
Prof Lewis’ book is a fat scholarly tome, dense with information. And pricey. For a more popular approach, less expensive and rather fun, though also based on firm scholarship, try this one. Dr Starakopoulou is on the faculty at Exeter in the UK. She is a constant presence on YouTube and reminds me of Dr Ehrman in a lot of ways, balancing scholarship (she has a fine monograph on child sacrifice in Ancient Israel) with the ability to write popular books.
Thanks for these Stephen. Lately I’ve cracked John Collins’ Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, and Levine, Knight’s The Meaning of the Bible. I’ve also read 2 of books written by Mark Smith which I can’t recall the exact titles: The Priestly Interpretation of Genesis 1 and The Early History of God. Smith and Collins have been good so far as describing the regional influences on the gods of the OT and some of how these people viewed the gods, such as how Robert suggests that Yahweh was not particularly seen as omnipresent. (And later I see some suggestion of messengers/angels representing his presence instead) I was just particularly interested in losing the concept that Eve was the cause for evil and death coming into the world (as told in Genesis). I suppose my “fate” approach was trying to place equal “blame” on both parties.
Jill, my pleasure. I’m familiar with both Collins and Smith. Excellent stuff!
I was just particularly interested in losing the concept that Eve was the cause for evil and death coming into the world (as told in Genesis). I suppose my “fate” approach was trying to place equal “blame” on both parties.
Sounds like you would enjoy this one-
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by Ziony Zevit
Prof Zevit is a renowned Hebrew scholar. The book is about the various interpretations of the first four chapters of Genesis with an emphasis on the way it was interpreted by the folks who produced it and subsequent Jewish responses. It’s often surprising to find out just how differently the Jews interpret their scriptures than Christians do! A terrific book and what’s more, unlike a lot of scholarly material, affordable!
Some notable sloppiness in the Eden narrative:
1) God tells Adam re the prohibited tree before making Eve. She tells the serpent what God had said. Either Adam told her what God had told him (so she would only have heard second hand) or God told A&E together (second time for Adam) or, somehow implausibly, God took Eve aside for instruction.
2) Reference to Euphrates is a howling anachronism.
It follows a description of streams from the ground prior to God sending rain; no way ground streams would produce the course of an orthodox river flowing from the highlands.
Furthermore, the setting precedes the tectonic upheaval of the fountains of the deep opening in the deluge – again, river’s course would be different.
Euphrates is a Greek take on old Iranian (first millennium bce) name. Ancient sumerian name for river likely completely different
…a howling anachronism.
The best advice I ever got from a teacher about how to read mythology is to recognize that they partake of dream logic. Ever notice how when you’re dreaming, no matter how weird it seems, in the dream it all makes perfect sense? It’s only from a waking perspective that it seems bizarre.
Stephen said
…a howling anachronism.The best advice I ever got from a teacher about how to read mythology is to recognize that they partake of dream logic. Ever notice how when you’re dreaming, no matter how weird it seems, in the dream it all makes perfect sense? It’s only from a waking perspective that it seems bizarre.
That is a useful observation, although I have had a few dreams that I can remember thinking, in the dream, that “this HAS to be a dream.” I have always thought that the strange lack of internal logic of many fairy tales is because they were originally based on dreams.
Stephen said
…a howling anachronism.The best advice I ever got from a teacher about how to read mythology is to recognize that they partake of dream logic. Ever notice how when you’re dreaming, no matter how weird it seems, in the dream it all makes perfect sense? It’s only from a waking perspective that it seems bizarre.
Right. Robert Miller suggests that the point of the odd coordinates was precisely to keep people from trying to find Eden; or that it does not exist. Miller also says that the nature of the universe as it has been described in Genesis 2 is meant in the Israelite mind as what ought to be, not what really is. He goes on to say of interest, because in no other Near Eastern creation myth was humanity once living in a different state than now. Every other creation myth explains how the world came to be, and that is what it is as intended. Genesis 2 is saying the way things are now is not the way God had really have wanted it to be, and it’s our fault. ((May I emphasize “our”?))
Robert Miller suggests that the point of the odd coordinates was precisely to keep people from trying to find Eden.
Someone needs to inform those folks who keep making sad attempts to locate Noah’s ark.
I had long wished to go there, but there were obstacles. One of them was that I could not find it on any map.
-Freya Stark on Alamut
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)