by David D. Horowitz

A garden full of uninhibited questioning and reasonable exchange: this I prefer to the Biblical Garden of Eden.

For me, God represents natural forces and material which the living, to survive, must respect. This respect entails dialogue with nature and among ourselves. Such dialogue promotes learning through experience, test, and challenge. Our scientific knowledge, artistic achievements, and ethical awareness develop best in this way. Ideally, we wean our young from mere obedience to help them become citizens capable of independent thought, not slaves to dogma or threats from power. We cannot simply eat the fruit of a tree to become ethically wise, but neither can we expect to gain ethical knowledge through mere obedience to a holy book and its depiction of God as a punitive parent. That makes a person a vessel spouting theocratic dogma, not a citizen engaging others with courtesy and humility.

The Biblical story of the Garden of Eden, and the consequent Fall of Humanity, is consistent with another story from the Book of Genesis: that of Abraham and his son Isaac. Abraham is willing to sacrifice his son Isaac because a voice, ostensibly of God, commands him to do so. Yes, an angel presumably saves Isaac, but willingness to murder (or “sacrifice”) because one hears a voice of God is cruel. One should mistrust, not obey, voices telling one to murder some innocent child. Not obeying such brutal instincts evinces respect for God.

The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus favored the garden as a place of rumination, conversation, and pleasurable reciprocity. Epicurus approves of our philosophical, questioning, testing nature. Of course, questioning can lead some astray—but so can obedience. At least, as questioners amongst other trained, reasonable peers, we have a chance to recognize and eliminate our mistakes before they do damage. Let us emulate life in Epicurus’ garden—not the naïve obedience and mindless stewardship of the Biblical Garden of Eden.