Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?
The question implies an untrue concept of God as personal entity. The underlying issue for the question is why patriarchal monotheism conquered matrifocal nature worship in the Ancient Middle East. The Old Testament Book of Judges Chapter 18 provides an excellent answer to this question, showing that communities who tried to keep to old 'Golden Age' ideals of peace and justice got obliterated by soldiers with swords. The symbolic meaning of the rule of Adam over Eve is that Israel’s national security required a regimented hierarchical male dominated religion.
Is it really that clear? Genesis 3:6 says “When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit of it, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate.” The fall from grace into corruption is therefore mythologised as due to the woman tempting man. Paul says in Romans 5:12 “sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin” but the ideology was that Adam’s fall was prompted by Eve accepting the advice of the snake.
That is a wrong reading. You seem to be taking Paul’s summary at Romans as a way to ignore the very broad Judeo-Christian ideology that justifies female subordination by reference to the claimed action of Eve in offering Adam the forbidden fruit.
Punishment of the innocent is a consequence of the fall from grace. It is not mean to be just, but rather a consequence of the alienation of humanity from nature and God.
This Biblical vision of the pre-existent Christ as eternal Logos is presented in the Bible as showing the way to eventually end the punishment of the innocent through the rule of love. I am discussing these themes at the ex-christian discussion forum with Tat Tvam Asi, examining the possibility of a scientific astronomical basis for these myths.
Where do you get that God rewards Adam? He doesn’t. The expulsion from Paradise replaces a life of leisure and abundance with a life of toil and scarcity. That is not a reward. The patriarchal religion is a result of the fall, as the only way to ensure social unity and security in a world of increasing conflict.
The logic behind this suggestion does not make sense. God setting men above women is a myth/paradigm which was successful in Israel and elsewhere because the alternative myth/paradigm of gender equality was unworkable. The communities who tried to hold to gender equality got destroyed by rapacious armies. The Bible contains the ideas of the victors. The male superiority theory only survived because it was a more adaptive ideology in evolutionary terms, suited to the social environment of war. The authors of this theory attributed it to God to give it extra weight, but it makes no sense to accept that false metaphysics of God as a personal intentional entity. God is better explained as a psychological projection of human desires.
Ideas about God evolve memetically by cumulative adaptation to selective pressures. A prevailing mythological paradigm can survive only as long as it functions better than alternatives. Myths do not come from on high from transcendental divine revelation, even though part of their success is the claim that they do come from God. When enough people stop believing the myth it collapses. That process is still underway with the myth of Adam and Eve.
The whole Christian dogma of patriarchy is a myth that reflects the social needs of the Iron Age. As we now transition into a new age, whether you want to call it the information age, the rising bronze age or the Age of Aquarius, Christianity will only survive by reforming to accept gender equality. But that is far from simple, given the intense connection between patriarchy and military ideas of national security from the days of Christian and Jewish origins.
My reading of that question begins with the scientific hypothesis that the slow process of natural climate change provides the durable stable context for genetic evolution of life on earth. This climate process is driven by orbital patterns. The very interesting thing in support of this hypothesis is the observation that a natural repeating orbital period equates to the annual season of planetary fall, seen in purely scientific objective empirical measurement. This orbital cycle correlates exactly with the 6000 year long period that Christian theology interprets as the fall from grace. So the memetics of human cultural evolution is nested inside the genetics which is nested inside the astronomy. God, or Nature, sits outside this whole millennial change process as the rules of natural order in the cosmos.
Blaming God for the fall is equivalent to blaming God for the cold dark harsh barren weather that recurs every winter in temperate latitudes. The fall season is part of nature like night follows day, both at the annual level that we are familiar with and also at the longer framework of precession as seen in glacial data. The challenge of surviving winter is enabled by knowledge that spring and summer are coming back.