"…but from the tree of the knowledge
of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you
will surely die." ~Genesis 2:17
(Although I read the other day there
were no apples in the Middle East at that time, but, nonetheless, they had fallen…maybe
I’m being too literal?)
As
Christians come to interpret this “transgression,”
it represents an “original sin”
through which not only human beings, but all of Gods creations fall out of the
right relationship with God. So, despite Gods creative grace, despite the work
God does to draw us to him, we have separated ourselves and continue to resist
God.So…that’s the story.
Let me ask
you a few questions…
~ Is the
story about Adam and Eve a literal story about the “fall” of man?
~Is the fall about a moment of corruption that
enslaves mankind into sin…forever?
Or
~ Is the
Adam and Eve story poetic hyperbole about the “ascension” of human consciousness?
~ Could the fall represent the moment of
enlightenment that man realized the conundrum of good and evil that presides
within all of us?
Saint Paul
once proposed that we are divided between what he calls “old man” and the “new
man,” between the law of God and the law of sin.
This dilemma
was eloquently expressed in Paul’s writing to the Romans…
“For what I am doing, I do not
understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the
very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree
with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the
one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good
dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the
doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I
practice the very evil that I do not want. 20 But if I am doing the very thing
I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.”
Romans 7:15-20
What if Paul’s dilemma could be
explained?What if the “old man” Paul speaks of is an ancient area of our brain (limbic system) that has ironically led to the successful evolution of our species. The “old man” is our instinctive emotions (i.e. sinful nature) that we have inherited from a much more dangerous world… a dangerous world which favored species that had a strong biological drive to procreate, murder, consume, and steal. These “sinful traits” were all essential in the harsh evolutionary world from which we arose.
The “new
man” Paul speaks of is an area of our brain (neo-cortex “New Brain”) that has
brought awareness and revealed the conscious creature that we have become
today.
This merging
of the “old man” and the “new man” brings forth an “anxious sense of self” that is forged by two opposed and
irreconcilable forces.
Sigmund
Freud once referred to these two forces as the, “The blind drives of biology and the moral constraints of society.”
So, I guess
we’re back to my original question…
Is the “fall of man” a story about the fall of
humanity?
Or
Is the “fall
of man” a story about the ascension of human consciousness?
For me it’s
a beautiful story about humanities rise from an instinctual beast to a conscious
creature which becomes aware of the dichotomies that exist within us all. It’s an awareness and appreciation of our
ancestor’s daunting task on its way to becoming fully human. I believe it’s time to advance the “fall of man” narrative into the twenty first century. We need a greater understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself.
With this
understanding, we can become a responsible, productive species that does not
blame external forces, but understands the full consequences of our actions
through the neurological narrative of rational thought and honest discourse.
“We need more understanding of human
nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself. He is the
great danger. And we are pitifully unaware of it. We know nothing of man ...
far too little. His psyche should be studied — because we are the origin of all
coming evil”
~C.G. Jung
