Just a story?

The last thing I'm trying to do is instigate a theological debate. Stories like the one of the "Fall" can be used theologically, but they don't have to be. The stories, whether we like it or not, are part of our heritage and tradition, so simply ignoring them isn't wise either.

There are two issues involved here: one is purely theological, the other can be, but doesn't have to be. The former is, of course, the notion of "sin" in general, "Original Sin" in particular. As Rhett Butler so eloquently formulated it in Gone With the Wind: frankly, I don't give a damn. If you're not a follower of the affected religion, then it probably doesn't matter to you either, and to me, that's not the important issue in the story. No, the other, not-necessarily-theological issue is more interesting to me: were Adam & Eve in a position to defy G-d; did they defy G-d; did they have the ability to say "no"? The issue addressed here is anything but a simple one, for what we are talking about, at bottom, is the notion of Free Will.

This has been a hotly debated topic in more fields than just theology for longer than any of us can remember. Biologists, zoologists, anthropologists, ethnologists, sociologists, psychologists, and other students of human nature have definitely put in more than their two-cents' worth over the years. I'm not sure there is a definitive answer to the question, but as I read the story, we do, and that is not without its consequences. Let me tell you what I mean.

For the purposes of our discussion, it is relevant whether G-d knows what they will do, how they will decide. We're not looking at the story of evidence of G-d's intentions or omniscience or omnipotence, rather we are only concerned with our two human participants and what they do. Well, we know what they do: they eat of the fruit, even though the One "in charge" forbade them to do so. In other words, even expressed mundanely, they disobeyed. To me, this is the most important point in the story. We (humans) have the capacity, the ability, the obligation (?) to sometimes say "no", to sometimes say, "I'm not going to do what I'm told". Granted, the One in charge seemingly comes down on our two no-sayers like a ton of bricks, but to me this only says that there are consequences to our saying "no". It doesn't mean they are necessarily negative, just don't be surprised if they are. Does this mean that the story is telling us "don't say no, or you're in for big trouble"? Personally, I don't think so, but that's an issue that will have to wait until next time.