About the rich, ripe, round, red rosy apples they call forbidden fruit!

This is a giant post about the Fall of Man. I am not a learned theologian (though I can hear Rhonda's voice popping in telling me I need to go to seminary). I don't come to a giant dramatic conclusion. But I have been thinking, a LOT.

I had never really paid a huge amount of attention to the Fall of Man. I mean, sure, I knew it just as well as any other kid who went to Sunday School every week. My senior year of high school, I played Eve in The Apple Tree (my only leading role and it had to do with religion. Telling), so I looked more into it then, but that was more based on Mark Twain's Diaries of Adam and Eve (which are GREAT). But as far as the doctrinal significance of that moment, it's seemed very much like a given, to me. "Okay, I get it, Adam plunged us all into sin forever, we suck, we're totally depraved, I get it, Calvin," (as Calvin shoots me a look from my dresser) "BUT there is prevenient grace that frees us from our sin. Get it? Got it. Good." (I need a Wesley mask to face off with my Calvin mask. Battle of the Johns.)

However, I just read CS Lewis' Problem of Pain, which is essentially "CS Lewis explains Christian doctrine without using buzzwords and occasionally even laughing." It got me thinking a LOT about the Fall of Man, translating Lewis' thoughts into my own language, and I actually lost a lot of sleep because I could not stop thinking about it.

The story goes:

Adam and Eve are happy in the Garden. Yay Eden.
There's the tree of the "knowledge of good and evil" that God says, "Don't eat the fruit of that tree or you shall die."
The snake comes and tempts Eve, saying, "You won't die, you'll become like God, knowing good and evil."
Eve tempts Adam.
Adam and Eve go "chomp!"
The first thing they realize is that they're naked and they sew fig leaves together.
Then something must happen and they take their newfound "clothes" off, because then they hear God walking in the Garden and they hide because they're naked again. So they hide.
God asks Adam where he is.
Adam says, "I heard you, but I was naked, so I hid."
God then knows they've eaten of the tree and curses them all.

I will NOT discuss "whose fault it is". Conservative Christians take to blaming Eve and thus put down women. I'm not a feminist by any stretch of the imagination, but this is really just using the passage to blame women, because Eve is technically the second link in the chain... if you want to blame anyone, blame snakes. (Besides, when a snake comes up to you and tempts you in a Fosse-style dance number... oh wait, that's The Apple Tree again, sorry.) I'll refer to the choice as being Adam's, because that's how I've read theologians talking about it, from back before they were using the passage to suppress women, when they just didn't acknowledge women. The blame game is stupid to me in life, so I'm not particularly interested in it in my theology.

To me, there seem to be two major things at play here. One, there is the idea of "knowledge of good and evil". Two, there is the question of obedience. I'll tackle "knowledge of good and evil" first, as that's what I know the littlest about.

It would be easy to read that God was being manipulative and tricky telling them that the fruit of this tree would make them die when they clearly did not die. However, it goes against a basic Christian belief (namely, the belief in God's goodness) to do so. There are many other kinds of death besides that of the physical body, and I believe that is what God refers to in that statement. That comment actually makes a lot of sense if you look at what happened. They made a choice that could not be undone, that changed the essence of their being. For even if God had NOT evicted them from the Garden, their experience of it would have been forever altered and significantly less pleasant.

What I find the most interesting is that the first experience after eating the apple is shame.

It is not, like the snake implies, a sense of knowledge that thrones Adam and Eve above all else. In fact, it's the opposite. Being a nerd, I relate it to the Total Perspective Vortex in the five-book trilogy The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams. The Total Perspective Vortex on Frogstar World B is a torture device that produces a scale model of the entire universe to give the person inside of it a sense of proportion - the vast infinity of all of creation, and his or her own minuscule position inside of it with a "You Are Here" marker. This knowledge generally makes the person inside go insane and die.

The argument could be made that shame being the first emotion after eating the apple means that the human race is naturally inclined towards evil. I am not convinced by this argument, because I don't believe God would create anything naturally inclined towards evil. I think this, the first sin, brought evil into the world. Pandora's box, in a way. I think knowledge of what they'd done and the significance of that are certainly enough to cover the shame and everything else that happened. Evil was actually created by man. God merely allowed the possibility of it.

But why would a good God allow the possibility of evil?

And here I move into part two, the question of obedience, God's nature and the part that kept me up all night (aka: GOD IS MORE AWESOME THAN I EVER REALIZED).

Working with the Christian idea of God, there are a few basic essences of God being God that should be stated:

1. God is good. God does nothing that is evil.
2. God is sovereign. There is nothing that is out of God's control. This contains both the idea of God's omnipotence (God can do anything) and omniscience (God knows everything).
3. God is self-contained. This isn't discussed much, but God has no needs. God does not depend on anything but Itself. In many Christian theologies, the doctrine of the Trinity illustrates that God is entirely self-sufficient. God's needs, God's desires are all met by God. God isn't lonely. God isn't bored.

I think the true goodness and awesomeness of God lies in that third point. Because it then follows that anything God does to reach out of Itself is a choice.

This is huge. I know of nothing more powerful than a choice. I know of nothing stronger than a choice. I know of nothing more beautiful than I choice. I know of nothing more romantic than a choice. People talk about "destiny", "fate", "we were meant to be together", and yes, yes, yes, I hear you. But those are responses to human need, desires, and emotion, and all of those things are fickle. Tell me that you choose me even beyond those temporary inclinations and then we'll talk. A full-bodied choice can do anything. Tales are told about the power of the human will--the human will has its power from choice. I'm a big fan of choices. They're terrifying because of how much they hold, but they're essential.

God, not being subject to such human whims, operates soley on choice. There is a lot of language in the Bible about being "chosen people", but I think that scripture has been read primarily as "we're better than others", not in awe of the miracle that the Lord of everything, the only entirely self-sufficient being, has chosen us. Has chosen to love us. Has chosen to desire us. And, if He needs us, He only does because He has chosen to. When He says He will never forsake us, it is because His choice is so strong that He can assure that.

Wow.

God, being good, and having created Man in His image (probably the most potent, mysterious phrase in all of scripture), gave Man the ability to chose, which is what we generally refer to as "free will". He gave Man the full ability to chose, holding nothing back and offering the strongest and most dangerous choice - the choice between God and Man.

As Eden is depicted, there is a relationship between God and Man that is unparalleled today. God pours out His love and attention to Man, who in turn pours his love and attention to God. It's the ideal relationship in a basic sense. Since Man's love and attention is fixed solely to God, it follows that Man does not sin, because if he follows the will of God, there is no sin, because the will of God is good. In fact, really the only the Man can do wrong is disobey.

"Obedience" has a negative connotation where I am. I'm sure that connotation is different in different circles, but where I am in New York it summons the idea of mindless sheep, of people with no backbone who only want an easy life, and of people who want others to make choices for them. And, indeed, the call to obey has been used for evil plenty of times in the past, and even still today, even by members of the church. The command to obey is what has caused people to view religion as the "opiate for the masses" or as a way of controlling people. It is probably the most misused commandment. It's easy to manipulate people with it.

But, I'll say, if I ever get another tattoo (there are no current plans, for the record, I've just found myself writing this on tonight), it would be the word "obedience" on my right wrist. This would probably be a surprise to most, as I've never been the most obedient person. I'm not at all the most rebellious, to be sure, but the idea of being obedient to someone just because they're, say, your parent, has never really made sense to me. (Now, to be fair, my parents were never really the "because I said so!" kind of parents. They were generally very reasonable. I think this probably made me rather reasonable. And often I have acted in obedience, but not actually out of any feeling that I should be obedient, but that obeying made sense at that time.) But, since I trust and believe in God's goodness, I know that when I disobey God (which is often), it is because I am letting my fears and my pride get in the way of the work that needs to be done. Obeying God is radical today, and is an act of rebellion in the eyes of every single person who has used religion to control. Actually obeying God means loving with a love so radical that it threatens the people in control. It scares them. People who obey God are either lauded as saints or thrown in prisons. Or both. Funny how often that happens. Remember the one human who truly obeyed God was deemed a threat to all authorities.

However, obeying God is very, very difficult for us to do. It is uncomfortable, it is painful, it is contrary to a lot that seems natural for us.

Why?

Because of that first instance of disobedience. The choice that was presented was the Other (being God) or the Self. And Adam chose the Self, creating evil, setting sin loose, and condemning Mankind to a fixation on the Self. God knew that once it started, it would never stop. For God to have undone that one action, while possible for God, would have meant taking away our free will, for with freedom comes consequence. God "cursing" Adam and Eve may have been less of a curse and more of a proclamation of what inevitably follows such an act, because what they once were had died, and a new species with death and evil had been created. This is where the "by dust you were created and by dust you shall return" phrase comes in, which suggests that there was no death before this moment. 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 says "..by man came death" and "..as in Adam all die." By a mystery I will probably never fully understand, this moment caused evil and death, and now here we are today. Still disobeying (because every sin can be called disobeying God), but with a more terrible variety than Adam could have imagined.

And the very root of our sin is in that one choice.

Self, or Other.

Human suffering, as I understand it, in our disagreements up to our wars, is a result of imperfect love. We loved perfectly in the Garden, but since that choice, we've been unable to do so, because perfect love puts sole focus on the Other over the Self.

I have to pause for a moment to speak a little bit on the negative effects of altruism. I have an index card on my wall with "Denial of the self through altruism is just as bad as denial of the self through purposefully harmful means," which was my theme for my final Design project first year, chosen from a list of things I wrote down that I believed. The project involved people standing on chairs, a lot of imagery about self-mutilation, suicide, insanity, and the mental health problems doctors face... and ended with an image of a gummy bear hanging itself with the word "ALTRUISM" over it and the song "On The Good Ship Lollipop". And I stand by that project, because it's true. There's a very real situation where a caretaker can pour so much in to caring for someone else, particularly if there's medical issues involved (physical or mental), that they cannot take care of themselves anymore and end up depressed. This is a fairly common occurrence in teenagers now, because a majority of teenagers are depressed, and the duty to take are of a friend who is depressed and possibly suicidal is real. And if that friend is relying only on you, then there is a life weighing on you, and the effects that can have are astounding. There is a way that altruism CAN become a form of self-mutilation. It's something that seemed inescapable, because if you stay, you'll continue to crush yourself, and if you go, the other person will crush themselves. And there's the guilt factor of, "Well, you're supposed to help others," that prevents you from ducking out, as well. I dealt with this for a good chuck of junior and senior year. Then I met the most incredible person who ended up acting as my long-distance therapist, in a way, and gave me the best advice: "If you find yourself getting angry, that's when you need to pull yourself out of it. That's when you need to say, 'I love you, but we need to find someone else to help you.'" I don't know how to navigate this situation in the theoretical - that's how I navigated it in the practical. There are ways that we get wrapped into pain that is not even sacrificial, because it does not help anyone. And that is a huge, huge danger.

That said.

People might object with me on this, but hear me out. Perfect love (use of word "perfect" inspired by Wesley's "striving towards perfection") puts sole focus on the Other over the Self. It is true that the the Self DOES benefit from this love, but only if the Self is willing not to benefit at all. It's this strange little paradox that crosses a lot of religious boundaries... that the first must be last, that to gain life one must lose it. (This is explained aptly in the Harry Potter series--Harry must be willing to entirely lose his life, completely, for the good of others, which gives him the power to ultimately defeat Lord Voldemort.)

Such love is dangerous. I said I wouldn't do this, but I know of no better example, so I'll touch on it briefly: Toby, from Sweeney Todd. He loves fiercely and as close to perfect as anything I know. He adores Lovett. He would do anything for her. Anything. Toby would do anything for Lovett even if it meant hurting himself. Think: what's worse to Toby; for Toby to be hurt or for Mrs. Lovett to be hurt? For Mrs. Lovett to be hurt. And again, what's worse to Toby; for Mrs. Lovett to hate him, or for Mrs. Lovett to be hurt? The former is devastating... but the latter is worse. (I have textual evidence to back up my conclusions, but I'll spare you the indepth textual analysis. If you're interested, though, I'm happy to oblige. Also, if you don't know Sweeney, I apologize and invite you over for tea and a movie.)

I believe that Toby is the most powerful and dangerous person on stage, far more dangerous than Sweeney. You can do a lot more damage to someone else if you are not afraid of hurting yourself. Your punch will be devastating if you're willing to shatter your hand. I actually think that Toby could have changed the ending of the piece had he not been hiding in the sewers.

And thus we come to it.

Toby was hiding in the sewers.

The cause of much screaming and angst on my part, because I absolutely understand why. It is the reason I run away to New York (my Lovett is in Virginia). It is because the situation became too much to handle. ("Wildly he tries to break down the door. It is too solid for him. Whimpering, he stands paralyzed.") It is too much to begin to comprehend and causes denial and retreat. Understandably so, but still we are left as almost-heroes. Holding and comforting the Self at the very moment where if we pushed forward, we could perform what people now label as miracles.

Oh, Adam. We can try so hard, but you condemned us to this. It takes an extraordinary amount of will to escape this. The strongest choice in the world. Those who we call "saints" are those who have worked to put their whole focus on the Other over the Self, trying to reverse the choice that Adam made. Impossible, because of our nature, but some valiant attempts have been made. (Though the saints are always insisting in their own sin, because they are hugely aware of every moment where the Self is not pouring out to the Other. Which is most moments.)

In creating evil in the world, suffering was born. Thus, suffering is also a human creation, which God uses for good. God does not cause suffering, we do that well enough on our own--it is God who swoops in with the light in the midst of it.

And the thing that gets me the most is that God chose to embrace us within all that we wrought within His perfect creation. God chose to make Himself human. God chose to limit Himself to the experience of humanity, fully take on the evils of suffering that we created, and keep loving. Acting always with love, not just for one or few, but for all. Toby's love inspired violence, at the end, because he was fighting violence against one person. But Christ fought violence against all, even those who committed acts of violence against him, and so responded with only love, towards all.

You may say, "But Christ was God." Yes. But Christ was God, limited. Christ was God chosing to embrace all of the desires and whims that He is not generally subject to (being self-contained), all of the whims we face every day. The only thing retained was God's will, in a way... in Christ's complete obedience to God-the-Father's will. (Confused yet?) Christ showed us that it is possible to be released from sin and death, through his life, death, and spectacular resurrection. It just so happens that it's the hardest thing for us to do. Still, though, I can knowingly say that there is a great joy in suffering for someone you love.

Christ completes this cycle as mentioned in 1 Corinthians: For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

God continues to make all of Mankind's hideous trespasses into something glorious.

This is, for me, the beginning of an investigation. While I've had the shape of it for as long as I can remember, it's been surprising useful to look into the specifics as I continue to work to live in obedience to God's will.

Something I will note without coming to a conclusion about it because it still confuses me hugely: I know one person in particular who seems to live in the exact opposite way of the saints as described above. As far as I can figure out, it is like he has accepted selfish intent as a given and decided to use it instead of be enslaved by it. Very often, I've seen him use that selfishness to incredibly good and loving ends. It is fascinating and maddening and contrary to everything I've ever been taught or believed. I cannot tell if it's saintly or demonic. It challenges me, and for that I am grateful.

I would also like to take this moment to note, for whatever significance it may hold, that I am allergic to apples.