On Mon, 23 Mar 1998, Patsloane wrote:
> Certainly medieval moralists were hard on Eve. But I'm surprised at the
> fluidity of the story of the garden of Eden. It might easily sustain an
> argument that all three parties were punished equally (and by implication were
> all equally at fault).
>
My apologies in advance if I am too far off topic.
St Paul, writing in 1 Timothy 2:14, can be understood to say that Adam was
present at the temptation of Eve. This would be the simplest interpre-
tation of the phrase concerning Eve being deceived but Adam not being de-
ceived.
Here in North America a new breakfast food was introduced a few years
back. The TV advertisements featured an older boy being served the
cereal in question. He pushed it across the table to a toddler while
muttering, "Let Mikey eat it." Of course, Mikey does eat it voraciously
and all pour bowls full of the stuff to be devoured with gusto.
I bring up the TV ads because they seem to mirror the sort of situation
Paul envisioned in Eden. Adam knew the fruit was forbidden; Eve was de-
ceived. But Adam allows the scene to play out to its end, much in the
manner of the lad shoving the cereal over to Mikey. In Adam's case, it's
"Let Eve eat it."
Now, if only some wonderful, scholarly soul out there will post that this
interpretation of the Eden events (+ the Pauline passage) was also that of
a number of medieval exegetes, my cyber-cup will indeed run over.
Frank
Frank Morgret
15 Towering Hts -- #1206
St Catharines, Ontario
CANADA
L2T 3G7
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|