Following a glass or two of wine, my friend raised an interesting question. "About that Garden of Eden Story," she said, "at the creation of our birthing kind, which would a Rational Intelligent Being create first; one who could birth or one who could not? You don't have to answer", she cautioned, "because in reality, in this Patriarchal world, it really doesn't matter , does it? Because that's what happens when men write history--especially when history masquerades as religion, or worse, masquerades as the word of God!"
Nevertheless, it was an interesting question, not the same as but not far removed from the one that asks which came first, the chicken or the egg. But it was much more than that, too. Aside from the notion that human existence is part of an evolutionary process, if the creation of the male-female dyad were separate events, we can at best merely speculate. 
But those who regard the Christian Bible as the "word of God", "know" that Adam, the man, was created first. They also "know" that God saw that the man was lonely; that God took a rib from the man and created a companion and helpmate, whom the man called woman because "she was taken out of man."
But "that's what happens when men write history, especially speculative history", my friend continued. "Everything is about men, men being first, and, more importantly, about men's superiority over women. Most men are convinced that women were created for the singular purpose of attending to the needs of men. Is that really intelligent design?"
The implications are many; Some more poignant or more absurd than others. Here are just a few.
1. Without the man, the woman would not exist; no rib, no woman.
2. The woman is less than the man because she was created from a part of him--obviously a part he did not need.
3. God created the woman because the man was lonely and needed a companion and helpmate--not an equal partner, but a companion to help the man and provide solace to his loneliness.
4. If the woman had not been created, sin would not exist. As the biblical story goes, it is the women who was seduced by a beautiful serpent and convinced to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit. She consummated the sin for all of humankind by enticing the man to eat the forbidden fruit.
5. At the introduction of "sin" in the Garden God created "eastward in Eden", the man and woman, Adam and Eve, realized they were naked and were ashamed of being naked. Why they were ashamed was never explained. However, it is believed by many that their shame of being naked was the reason they covered up themselves; not because they desired protection from the elements.
6. Because they had sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, God expelled Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and thereupon denied them the previous gift of eternal life on Earth.
Of course, number 5 may have been a good thing. (Written, tongue firmly planted in cheek) Without realizing they were naked, they may not have realized their sexual differences and their sexual compatibility. Clearly the human species would have become extinct since human sexual reproduction apparently wasn't in the picture as a part of human creation.
Of course that is a ludicrous assumption. Mammals, of which humans are just one example, propagate their species through sexual intercourse and sexual reproduction, But suppose, for a moment, that the human male-female complement for sexual reproduction were not created concurrently or was not part of an evolutionary process. Which would a Rational Intelligent Being create first; one who could give birth or one who could not?
It's an interesting question; but not when men write history.
When Men Write History Women Are Accessory Companions.
Following a glass or two of wine, my friend raised an interesting question. "About that Garden of Eden Story," she said, "at the creation of our birthing kind, which would a Rational Intelligent Being create first; one who could birth or one who could not? You don't have to answer", she cautioned, "because in reality, in this Patriarchal world, it really doesn't matter , does it? Because that's what happens when men write history--especially when history masquerades as religion, or worse, masquerades as the word of God!"
Nevertheless, it was an interesting question, not the same as but not far removed from the one that asks which came first, the chicken or the egg. But it was much more than that, too. Aside from the notion that human existence is part of an evolutionary process, if the creation of the male-female dyad were separate events, we can at best merely speculate.
But those who regard the Christian Bible as the "word of God", "know" that Adam, the man, was created first. They also "know" that God saw that the man was lonely; that God took a rib from the man and created a companion and helpmate, whom the man called woman because "she was taken out of man."
But "that's what happens when men write history, especially speculative history", my friend continued. "Everything is about men, men being first, and, more importantly, about men's superiority over women. Most men are convinced that women were created for the singular purpose of attending to the needs of men. Is that really intelligent design?"
The implications are many; Some more poignant or more absurd than others. Here are just a few.
1. Without the man, the woman would not exist; no rib, no woman.
2. The woman is less than the man because she was created from a part of him--obviously a part he did not need.
3. God created the woman because the man was lonely and needed a companion and helpmate--not an equal partner, but a companion to help the man and provide solace to his loneliness.
4. If the woman had not been created, sin would not exist. As the biblical story goes, it is the women who was seduced by a beautiful serpent and convinced to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit. She consummated the sin for all of humankind by enticing the man to eat the forbidden fruit.
5. At the introduction of "sin" in the Garden God created "eastward in Eden", the man and woman, Adam and Eve, realized they were naked and were ashamed of being naked. Why they were ashamed was never explained. However, it is believed by many that their shame of being naked was the reason they covered up themselves; not because they desired protection from the elements.
6. Because they had sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, God expelled Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and thereupon denied them the previous gift of eternal life on Earth.
Of course, number 5 may have been a good thing. (Written, tongue firmly planted in cheek) Without realizing they were naked, they may not have realized their sexual differences and their sexual compatibility. Clearly the human species would have become extinct since human sexual reproduction apparently wasn't in the picture as a part of human creation.
Of course that is a ludicrous assumption. Mammals, of which humans are just one example, propagate their species through sexual intercourse and sexual reproduction, But suppose, for a moment, that the human male-female complement for sexual reproduction were not created concurrently or was not part of an evolutionary process. Which would a Rational Intelligent Being create first; one who could give birth or one who could not?
It's an interesting question; but not when men write history.
Tags: adam and eve, blog, evoluntionary process, forbidden fruit, garden of eden, history, intelligent design, sexual reproduction, sin
Reblog (0) | |
|