The Old Testament is a compilation of selected oral traditions passed on from one culture. These were the stories told around the campfire to give the early Hebrews a cultural identity. All tribes had their own oral traditions, but what is written in the Old Testament survived because the tribe eventually wrote them down.
There are a few things to consider about this. These stories were important enough for the tribe to pass down for generations before eventually writing them down. The second thing to consider is that these stories were passed on orally for thousands of years. Surely the significance of the stories would have changed their context over this vast period of time. The third thing is that these stories could only be based on all they knew, not all that was.
So what could the story of Adam and Eve have represented for the early Hebrews? The creation of the world? Certainly not, but what could have happened that was so significant that they would hold it in so high a regard as to call it creation? Can history give us any clues as to what could have been so significant to these people 10,000 years ago?
The fact is, history can tell us about a very significant event that happened in the same time and place, the Agricultural Revolution.
Now, it should be said that humans had been around for hundreds of thousands of years prior to the Agricultural Revolution. During this period, human population growth was slight. These early tribes were mostly hunter-gatherers with some low-level farming. A comparative look at some of the isolated tribes of today shows that they have a high respect for nature, and concepts like ownership of land and ownership of food are mostly non-existent. They lived as animals, in that they killed and ate what they needed, and for protection, but very rarely more than that. This is the law of limited competition as we see among other animals in the wild today. Humans did not claim dominion over the planet or its food. One day the human hunters caught the deer, another day the deer got away, and yet another day a tiger caught the deer. The humans did not resent the tiger for this because they were living as the tiger did. Whether the deer lived or who caught it, was up to the gods. By “the gods” I of course mean the Animist “gods” found in many tribal cultures.
Fast forward to the Agricultural Revolution when humans began to think differently about their food. Rather than rely on “the gods” for their food, humans began a concentrated wholesale campaign to grow and have complete control over their food. Animals were domesticated and raised on farms for the sole purpose of food. This time the deer or other livestock belonged to the humans first and foremost. The deer’s fate was sealed from birth, it belonged to the humans. The livestock was also protected from other prey, and when necessary, the humans went to war with other would-be competitors for the livestock. To put it another way, humans suddenly took control and decided who lived and who died. Until the Agricultural Revolution, this was the “Knowledge of the Gods.”
Do you see where this is going?
The story of the fall of Adam and Eve is the story of the Agricultural Revolution. The story is told from the point of view of a neighbouring tribe. They thought it was a bad idea as the gods had provided for all up to then and by claiming the knowledge of the gods (eating the apple) they had begun living outside of the laws of nature which had worked so well until then. These observers assumed chaos would ensue and “the gods” would no longer provide for them or protect them, thus they were “cast out of the garden.” Fortunately for the early Hebrews, this new form of making a living seemed to work quite well. It is likely that the observing tribe was assimilated as agriculture very quickly spread all over the world.
So the story of Adam and Eve wasn’t about the creation of humans, but the creation of civilization as we know it! Surely a story worthy of being passed down for generations.
Another thing that is interesting about this, is the spiritual basis of these people was taken away from them. What right did they have to claim dominion over the world and all the animals and plants in it? Who could possibly have given humans the authority to have the knowledge of the gods, of good and evil? Well, who else could give that kind of authority, but the gods themselves.
So this wasn’t just the birth of civilization as we know it, but also representing the invention of gods. What better coronation story for us, than to be created by god in his own image to rule over the earth.
It’s actually surprising how literal some of these stories can be taken once put in the proper context.
The story of Cain and Abel (along with many other Old Testament stories) is representative of the spread of agriculture. Cain, a farmer, represented an agriculturalist tribe who went to war with Abel, a shepherd, who represented a tribe of, well, shepherds.
[...] First of all we have to try to make some sense of the stories. The easiest to understand in a historical context is, surprisingly, the fall of Adam and Eve. [...]
I came across this on yahoo when I was looking up how old the first humans were, this was an answer to someone’s question, that took me to your YouTube video about the Blasphemy Challenge which then took me here. I really liked your ideas on the history of the Old Testament and how it coincided with the advent of writing and agriculture, which makes a lot of sense why this idea of god and religion was created. I mean the universe is just too old, large, and to complex to have been made by a being with intentions that a species of intelligent enough beings would come along and worship him for it.
I was a born Catholic and never quite understood Christianity, The Bible, Jesus, Heaven, Hell, and what any of this has to do with me, but in the essay when you say that God was made for humans to have a reason to rule the earth, it all started to make sense for me. Religion had never really been a spiritual thing for me, which stopped me from ever enjoying the concepts of heaven, but after understanding the reasons behind god and humans nature to create a godlike figure, I now think of heaven as a more artistic and beautiful thing, kind of a spiritual connection to the physical world, instead of a idea of a floating paradise in the sky. Religion all of a sudden seems more of an escape for people, a way for people to feel better about themselves and for them to find purpose, redemption, or just something it keep them from going crazy, but I feel I don’t need that, I understand those who do. This makes me think that religion isn’t all bad and that it can led to very good thing when used correctly, though charities, giving people sense of communities, and by helping them form a spiritual oneness. This reminds me of my dad, who is bipolar, and if he wasn’t such a intense Catholic he would probably go out of his mind. After reading your other ideas on Atheism, it has really appealed to me and I feel like I found something that I really get behind and understand. As opposed to the faith in religion Atheism only requires common sense. One deals with belief while the other deals with knowledge, I like that idea.
I also liked how you said in your video that Atheists and Theists need to stop arguing and start understanding each other. I completely agree with that, because a friend of mine is a die hard Non-Denominational Christian who doesn’t believe anything if it’s not in the Bible. Him and I have conversations of religion and god all the time and we never really seem to get anywhere. We both wouldn’t even think about changing our opinions and we both still can be friends and hang out, but we sometimes can’t believe what the other one is saying. which I never quite got, but the truth is that it is all just human nature and we just need to understand each other’s stand points and see where each other is coming from. Although I can’t see my friend ever seeing where I’m coming from because of his deep roots in The Bible. I’ll have to get back to on your ideas of dealing with extremely contrasting viewpoints cause I still haven’t grasped those ideas, but it looks very interesting.
Well, thanks for listening (sorry it was long, this is the first thing I’ve on the internet before, besides on Facebook), it’s nice to talk to someone who can share in my views on this subject. I’m a freshman in college this year and I’ve been challenging all of my values and belief recently and I’d like to thank you for your views, they’ve really opened my eyes and helped me understand what it was that I wasn’t understanding.
Thanks again, very much. Have a good one.
Joe K
Hi Joe,
Thank you for the kind words. I am honoured that you have found my writings to be inspiring and helpful in your recent examinations of your values and beliefs. You may certainly share your views here.
I am not sure if you’ve read much more of this blog (not that I’d blame you, much of it is boring) but my article “Is Religion Good?” ( http://noonespecial.ca/2010/11/is-religion-good/ ) explains many of the reasons why I speak out against religion. In short, there is nothing good about religion that is unique to religion, while what is unique about religion is utterly disastrous. “Good” people will find a way to do “good” deeds with or without religion. At the very least, without religion, those deeds can be determined rationally based on real-world circumstances rather than from assumptions about and interpretations of the archaic ideas of a bunch of bronze age goat herders.
Supernaturalizing the human experience makes it impossible to understand and value humanity’s place in the natural environment. That is why we have to move beyond religion. Of course, I’m not advocating being an asshole about it. Understand and tolerate the individuals, understand and resist religion.
I really should get better about cross-posting some of my more interesting ideas from Yahoo! Answers. If you want to know more about my own views, a good place to start would be through my Yahoo! Answers profile (see link in the right-hand column) and click on the “My Starred Questions” tab. Based on what you’ve written, you might be most interested in the following:
Evolutionary advantages to belief:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AuHdxVF8SmszJRxocMs2UvPty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120319192507AAxMFzA
Flaws in Biblical morality:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoAfaOmo1Rcd14o_9dS3xP7ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120308162729AAlu4rJ
More on the history of the Bible as it relates to real history:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aib.YcIOePGejn60n02sK6Lty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120308103202AAKlxVT
Why we’re so interested about the “end times”
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnepiGqfrz2PLTZ35hSTTJnty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120104234321AAImxX9
What Jesus has to do with it
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aoh5FIPE2DGKcockah3OPXjty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20110107205558AAPsp1G
Here are three books I highly recommend.
“Guns Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond (great overview of how and why civilization spread from the Fertile Crescent)
“The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins (great overview of biology and natural selection with lots of anecdotes. Also talks a lot about the way to think about evolution in terms of things like ‘morality’ and psychology.)
“Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn (provides a narrative to bring everything together and offers some suggestions of what it all has to do with you. This is perhaps one of the most important books I’ve ever read.)
If you have any questions or comments, feel free to let me know. Nice to meet you.
Thank you for the recommendations I will definitely check those out! And you’re right, religion is harmful and we don’t need it. Thanks again!
Absolutely! It is such a pity that when religiosos hear your logical, historical, common sense explanations to Biblical nonsense, they are trained by their religion to not listen, because you have been sent by the devil to bring harm upon their soul. Well, they didn’t keep me! HA-HA!
Hi there!
I came across the post after googling Adam and Eve and the agricultural revolution, as they talk about it in Sex at Dawn. Nice to hear your thoughts. If you haven’t read Sex at Dawn, I would recommend it. The authors argue against the principle of the Selfish Gene, so you might find a different perspective interesting. Start reading from chapter 5