Original Sin

Look, that was a long time ago.  I wasn’t even there.  I’ve never rebelled against God.  What does all that have to do with me?

Have you not benefitted from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge? 

Well, yeah, of course.  But it would be stupid to just throw away knowledge, once it’s learned.  Besides, I try to use that knowledge for the glory of God, and to make the lives of my fellow humans better.

So that they, too, become complicit in Sin? 

Oh, come on.  Seriously?  A farmer uses a lever to move a rock, and that’s the same thing as taking an apple from a Snake?

The Children of Eve are damned, every one. 

And there’s nothing we can do to atone for this ancient guilt?

Have you accepted the Savior? 

Well, sure.  Is that all I need to do?

Not quite.

Oh, okay, the tithe.  Fine.  I’ll donate 10% of my income…

Ten percent?  You will give up all your worldly possessions, because they are all derived from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. 

Fine.  Take it all.  Say, aren’t you a Child of Eve too?  Where does that leave you?


2 Commentsto Original Sin

  1. David Moore says:

    Jess, Dave Moore from Quora here. I like this. It makes sardonic sense!
    However, I ask this: was what we got from eating the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge really knowledge? Doesn’t knowledge depend on the method of acquisition being valid and verifiable? If some sorcerer’s apprentice hijacked your lab against your warnings and then said “I used TRIUMF to prove my TOE! See, Here’s the data in black and white!” what would your reaction be?
    Wouldn’t the validity depend on them ‘knowing what they were doing’ FIRST?
    Mmm…an a priori problem…

    Ps, the tree in the myth is “the tree of the knowledge OF Good and Evil”

    • Jess says:

      I know that, but this clumsy piece was meant as an allegory for the current version of “original sin”: the inherited guilt of those who have benefited from slavery perpetrated by their ancestors (or their representatives). I thought it was a cute trick — using an allegory AS an allegory — but I don’t think anyone got the point. I suppose I should not be surprised. It’s not that I don’t think there are reparations due to the descendants of slaves from the descendants of their oppressors, it’s that this particular form of moral obligation is much more nuanced than paying for something one did oneself. And it goes ‘way back….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *