My "main theory" if you will is an interpretation of Redemption. My interpretation of The Fall is a cursory theory that my main theory is not dependent upon however it accentuates the main theme. The reason for this is (a), my Redemption theory does not require my The Fall theory to be true, and (b) My Redemption theory is based on Pauline Christianity, whereas my The Fall theory is based on my interpretation of Genesis 3. Genesis 3 posses such a problem to Judeo/Christianity that the Septuagint's Book of Wisdom, chapter 2 simply redefined "die" etc just so 'god' in the story does not turn out to be a liar (a point later popularized by Paul with the 'death entered in' crap).

"The Fall" is the supposed fall of mankind described in Genesis chapter 3, where Adam and "The Woman" (who no one bothered to give a name until they were being kicked out of Eden) supposedly went against the will of 'god' and caused an inheritable "sin" and thus all of mankind is screwed. Jews believe that one can 'get good with 'god'' via "acts" and following 'the law' given to Moses. Pauline Christianity teaches that one finds "salvation" through faith in Jesus Christ only, even though some of the New Testament books mention acts and faith and some verses just mention acts (but of course none of them say anything against faith, so this is not too great a conflict). Roman Catholicism states as a matter of dogma that Adam and Eve were immortal until "the fall" and to support this dogma, they use verses written by Paul instead of actually LOOKING at the Genesis story because as Paul says in 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God"
The phonic Greek "pas graphe theoneustos..." Literally translated as "all scripture is "'god'breathed", which means that ol' Paul is magic and like the pope, can't make any mistakes. Ridiculous, isn't it? 


First off, the story in Genesis doesn't say anything about immortality, Satan or Lilith (Adam's first lippy wife) being the snake, etc. These are all derived from sources external to Genesis. (In fact, "the story" about Satan being the snake in the Garden of Eden is nowhere in any version of the bible, but there is allusion to it).


WHY is 'original sin' so muddled? I think it's obvious. If one takes the 'Eden is a gilded cage' story literally, then the story in Genesis chapter 3 tells how 'god'-Yahweh told a lie and got busted by 'people' who knew better, namely the snake. This little mythological tale was borrowed by the ancient Jews, tweaked and turned around to show that human efficacy is really a bad thing and not a good thing and then as a consequence of Christianity being a schism of Judaism, the Christians 'inherited' the talking snake et al. The real problem here is that Paul and company just couldn't accept a 'god' that tries to trick us using lies and deceit, even if we accept that it has a cosmic plan that we can't fathom in the long run. So, Paul redefined "death" in the story to not mean real physical death (as the Hebrew "Muwth" really means). He deliberately left what was meant by "death" ephemeral and vague. Did it mean spiritual death, or mortality? Did it mean to be separated from 'god' or that we will die from infirmity? It's all hogwash and "typical fundy spin". I refer to Paul "the church robber" (2 Cor 11:8) as the "Patron Saint of Fundys".


  These nuances such as whether Original Sin is really inherited sin (Augustine) or that we inherit a "sinful nature" (the Eastern Orthodoxy and many Protestant Churches) are inconsequential.What is important is the meaning and "moral" of the story itself. What the story tells us is that 'god' wanted us to remain mindless, much like the dumb animals and to do as we are told without question or reflection. Eve is told by Adam (we assume) about the tree of knowledge of good and evil and the fruit that grows on it that they are not supposed to eat (or touch Eve said) "lest that day they shall surely die." The snake told her that this is not true and that if she eats of the fruit, she will be as 'god', knowing good and evil. The rest is fable history. It turns out that the SNAKE told the truth and 'god' is the liar. Ironic, isn't it?

(Go here for a break down of the story and an examination of the verses broken down into Hebrew, which is more than Paul ever did as his bible was the Septuagint. This proves my interpretation of Genesis chapter 3 despite dogma).

  Morality requires moral choice. Moral choice requires knowledge of good and evil. Adam & Eve acquiring the ability to be moral beings is portrayed as immoral. This is a logical contradiction. If to become capable of morality is immoral, then morality itself would be immoral; a logical paradox and absurdity.

In Genesis 3:22, "And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"


What is "inherited" is knowledge of good and evil. Why is this so bad? Why is it "bad" for beings that were 'made in his image' to be 'like US, to know good and evil'? Because in order for man to be anything other than amoral, he has to take responsibility for his own thoughts and actions, which implies a "prideful" worthiness to do so, and as they say, pride precedeth the fall. It is perceived as "bad" for man to consider himself to have inherent worth other than being chattel for 'god', and this leads us away from "communion" with 'god', i.e. having self worth makes us less "worm-dirt worthless" as sycophants and toadies to 'god'. The message of "the fall" is the message AGAINST basic human worth. It is a message AGAINST basic human rights. (If they were a gift, then they wouldn't be rights). The message is that Freedom & liberty = sin = Evil, as this is perceived as being non-sheep-like and 'straying' away from the 'Shepard' and his influence.


  Paul himself states that through salvation we can again attain this "sheep-like" state of non-reflection and simply reflect the will of 'god'. Paul says that you are either a slave to sin or a slave to 'god' (Romans chapter 6) and that you are a bought slave.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 (New World Translation)
"What! Do YOU not know that the body of YOU people is [the] temple of the holy spirit within YOU, which YOU have from God? Also, YOU do not belong to yourselves, for YOU were bought with a price. By all means, glorify God in the body of YOU people."

That you are to enslave your thoughts and mind to the will of 'god'.

2 Corinthians 10:5
"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ;"

The message here is that slavery is "good" and freedom is "evil". That Adam & Eve acquiring the ability to be moral people is immoral and that having your "eyes opened" to the truth is "wrong" and "bad".


Since morality requires moral choice, and moral choice requires knowlege of good and evil, and the action that caused the ataining of knowledge of good and evil is the same action that was "disobedience", then the "moral" of the story in Genesis 3 is Morality = Sin = Evil = torture from 'god' sans Jesus. It was the 'becomeing as US, to know good and evil', that we are to beg forgiveness for.

The "Original Sin" we inherited is the ability to mindfully understand good from evil and to be capable of making moral choice as opposed to remaining like dumb, dimwitted animals. To be sheep is "good" and to be a man or woman in the modern sense is, as Paul explains in Romans, "depraved". Pauline Christianity says that inheriting the capability to be moral makes us "depraved".

Of course, these are not values, but rather anti-values.

This is immoral.

Why, if Jesus didn't inherit "original sin" did he know what good and evil are? Because he was one of the 'US's.


The Vampire
LOGOS
The Fall
Back to
"Why Christianity is Evil"
The cursory theory
a
Read/Write comments about this piece