In my explanation of man’s depravity from the view of a recurring, individualized (non-historical) Fall, I have argued that mankind’s natural separation from God was in origin a result of natural self-preservation instincts. These instincts progressed first into childish selfishness and then, with the onset of divinely gifted God-consciousness (Romans 1:18-21), those instincts gone unchecked morphed into moral failure (sin), to the effect that scarcely had our species become aware of its Creator before it began to reject Him.
I thought of this when I came upon the following quote from C.S. Lewis:
If God were a Kantian, who would not have us till we came to Him from the purest and best motives, who could be saved?
It strikes me that God uses the selfsame aspect that damns us to redeem us. Self-regard is not an absolute evil; it is a neutral currency of the universe, one of which our ultimate God naturally demands the ultimate possession. This is no doubt because our blessed Maker, in molding man in His Own image, also imprinted upon him another, converse attribute of which He is the ultimate expression: self-sacrifice. In fact, it is this expectation God has of us, not the self-regard shared by every creature from amoeba to ape, that separates man from beast. That God demands something we are in some sense capable of but not predisposed to do is analogous to a parent teaching her daughter to help her in the kitchen, or her son to brush his own teeth (without swallowing the toothpaste!) so they won’t rot out of his head.
In order for us to become like Him, we must subordinate our self-regard to our self-sacrifice; but thankfully, as Lewis notes, we are not required — nor are we able — to perform self-sacrifice wholly independent of self-regard.
What do you think of this?
Steve,
I’m struggling a bit here. Even though I don’t believe the garden of eden was literally and historically true, God communicated incarnationally through scripture, that is according to ANE cultural norms, what was trustworthy. It seems then that some period of paradise and tree of life could have occurred in some way. I see no reason why God couldn’t have miraculously interceded once evolution had done it’s job. Once a being is made in his image, the God of Life and Love, reveals and gives Life and Love to that image bearer. Of course, as a God of love he does not force that Love to be recipricocated but at least the image bearer needs to know what he/she is rejecting.
I do know, from Walton, that the garden represented the holy of holies from which God wanted man to spread to the rest of his creation. That’s why in Romans 8, Creation groans, as this plan wasn’t realized. It seems that in some way your narrative should fold some of this theology in. But perhaps I’m missing some other meaning and importance to the paradise portion of the Genesis narrative.
Dan
Dan, please see my comments at http://undeception.com/?p=133#comment-484