I assume that this passage was included in the lectionary for this week as an explanation for Paul's comments about Adam in the Romans passage, how different the grace of Jesus Christ is from the sin of Adam. That being said, I find myself more interested in how the passage got in the canon rather than how Paul used it to make a Paul point.
I'm reading "Come Out, My People!" by Wes Howard-Brook and recommend that you do, too.
Howard-Brook asserts that the first eleven chapters of Genesis, as we have them, were written during the time of the Babylonian Exile. They were intended to help them wrestle with issues such how could God have let their nation and temple be destroyed and how were they to live in a foreign land. (I'm just skimming--you really do need to read this book.)
He also asserts that two streams run through the Bible--
a religion grounded in a covenantal bond between God and God's people intended for the blessing and abundance of all people and all creation, and
a religion that is actually a human invention that is used to justify and legitimate attitudes and behaviors that provide blessing and abundance for some at the expense of others.
He call the first religion, that of creation, and the second, of Empire.
Now to the passage for this week:
Howard-Brook points out that the woman misquotes the Lord God. Compare 2:16-17 with 3:2-3. The woman makes several changes including the addition of a prohibition, "nor shall you touch it."
We still do this. We read in the Scriptures what God has said. Then we enhance it or manipulate it to fit actions we don't approve of or to malign people that seem disagreeable to us.
What is the sin? Can overstating God's commands lead us to inappropriate actions?
No comments:
Post a Comment