You can infer some degree of intimacy by arguing that
the biblical creator somehow “needed” to create the
world and humans, but the real impact of Genesis's’ opening
is a “Wow!” Meaning, there was no need
to create the world. In fact, creation becomes, in
the Abrahamic tradition, a graceful, grace-filled and in the same vein
a gratuitous act of God’s dominion which
is a mystery that is unfathomable to the human mind.
In the this tradition, one cannot look
to the created’s experience to understand the created.
In short,
Genesis lets us know that this
world is god’s world,
not ours. The subsequent Garden of Eden is
not ours, either. It is god’s holy place,
not mankind’s.
What is the impact of all of this?
It speaks directly to the Earthfolk notions of
intimacy, vital zest and skin. Remember that: While
humans come from this Lone Male God, they are not created
from his intimacy—not from His vital zest. Humans
are not a “divine spark” or in any way
intimate with the Biblical god. Intimacy is a term of birthing, and
in Genesis there is no birthing. No cosmic
groaning. Rather, there is only an exercise
of power, of dominion. Just a magical moment of conjuration. “Presto!” Not
the passionate, steamy, heart-thumping heat of frenzied erotic coupling—no creating
with vital zest!
Right from the start, then, you begin
to understand—as you first hear this tale told, today or millennia
ago—that something rather peculiar is being
proclaimed. This “Biblical tale” is truly a revolutionary,
radical break with any then current creation story. There was no
need to parallel or emulate other creation stories by using analogy and metaphor,
e.g., humans are not suckled by the Great Wolf. In these other creation
accounts, there is always a way to connect to the
creation story by examining one’s current relationships to humans
and animals. Such stories explained the intimate life-force
linkage, that is, how the energy of life flows from one living
thing to another.
Continue—Skin
