Time and again, the regulars here will have encountered individuals, who want to assert that the Genesis story is something other than a fabrication of the imaginations of pre-scientific nomads. Apart from the numerous places where this story is directly at variance with the findings of cosmological physics and biology, the whole premise of this story as a purported narrative on ethics, is itself fatuous and risible, and I shall now provide a dissection thereof, for the benefit of those interested in dealing with the tiresome, and at times, duplicitous apologetics peddled on this matter.

First, let us determine what is being asserted in this story. One of the defining aspects of mythology, and Genesis is no exception, is that mythology consists of the presentation of one or more assertions, purportedly constituting fact about the physical universe and its contents, which are intended by the authors to be treated as true, regardless of whatever observational data may point in a completely different direction. The principal assertions I wish to focus on here, are that:

[1] Humans were purportedly "created" by an invisible magic man;

[2] Said humans were purportedly "created", completely bereft of the capacity for ethical thought and reasoning;

[3] That capacity for ethical thought and reasoning could only be acquired by those humans, if they consumed a certain variety of magic fruit.

Assertion [3] above is risible on its own, in the light of decades of neuroscience research into the ventromedial pre-frontal cortex, some of which I cover in depth in this post, and which I therefore have no need to cover in depth again. Apparently, we are supposed to accept as fact, that the first humans either completely lacked this part of the brain, or had a non-functioning version thereof, which is absurd in the light of the fact that other primates demonstrably possess this feature. It would be bizarre indeed if the invisible magic man of this mythology, chose to endow chimpanzees and rhesus macaques with a working ventromedial pre-frontal cortex, whilst omitting it from humans. However, that is merely one of the many absurdities contained in this tale.

In addition, I am not aware of anyneuroscience literature, that contains findings to the effect that our ventromedial pre-frontal cortex only starts working properly if we eat certain types of fruit, or that the performance of this part of the brain is enhanced via this route.

I'll leave aside at this juncture, the fact that the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees almost certainly possessed a working ventromedial pre-frontal cortex, and we inherited ours from that ancestor; instead, I'll continue by taking the mythological assertions at face value, as the authors thereof almost certainly intended, and point to more absurdities arising from doing so.

Let's move on to assertion [2], namely, that the purported "first humans" in this story, were bereft of the capacity for ethical thought or reasoning. This on its own constitutes a gigantic plot hole in the story, because entities incapable of ethical thought or reasoning, cannot properly be held responsible for their actions. This is a basic principle that applies in any properly constituted, well-developed jurisdiction, and in cases where individuals thus handicapped commit criminal acts, the response considered proper in said jurisdictions, is to place those individuals in a suitable hospital facility.

Combine [2] and [3] above, and we have a situation where the only means by which the purported "first humans" could possibly have known whether or not eating said fruit was "wrong", was to eat the fruit in question and acquire the requisite ethical capacity. Prior to doing so, they would be, according to [2] and [3], completely incapable of determining this for themselves.

So, we have two ethically incapable stool pigeons, let loose on the world, and the only reason they have for accepting the supposed "wrongfulness" of eating that magic fruit, consists of "Magic Man Says So". That is the only source of "ethical" guidance that these two stool pigeons have.

Next, we come to another assertion, namely:

[4] The two humans in question were told that Magic Man lied to them on this matter, by a talking snake.

Leaving aside the complete absence of documented instances of talking snakes in the scientific literature, we have more plot holes. First, in order for the snake to know that this was the case, said snake, aside from being blessed with fantastic linguistic gifts not observed in any descendants, would also need to have precisely the same level of cognition as a reasonably modern human being, and the underlying brain apparatus supporting this. This would presumably include a functioning ventromedial pre-frontal cortex, a feature which is, as far as I am aware from the literature, absent in reptiles. Did this snake also eat some of this magic fruit? Was this snake given a prohibition against consuming said magic fruit by Magic Man? The absence of any mention of this constitutes another plot hole.

Then, of course, said snake would, of course, be as much a part of the "creation" as everything else mentioned in the story, and would presumably, according to the requisite assertions, also have been "created" by Magic Man. Who apparently had no problem letting snakes wander around displaying powers of cognition above their station.

So, after listening to this remarkably gifted snake, the two ethically incompetent stool pigeons set about eating the magic fruit.

We are then presented with another assertion, namely, that:

[5] The act of eating the magic fruit, precipitated the wholesale ruination of a purportedly "perfect" creation.

Except that this is another risible plot hole in itself. What definition of "perfect" can possibly be applied, to a setup that has a built in self-destruct mechanism of this sort? The idea that a "perfect creation" could be buggered up on a grand scale, just because two mentally deficient humans eat the wrong piece of fruit, on its own should be regarded by anyone with functioning neurons as a piece of pathetic comic absurdity.

But, it's even worse than that, because having set up the self-destruct mechanism, Magic Man then sets about arranging for that self-destruct mechanism to be triggered. Which means that even taking the assertions of this mythology at face value, we are led to the conclusion that Magic Man set up these two stool pigeons to blow up the whole edifice right from the start. Then, of course, Magic Man throws a hissy fit, and not only blames the two hapless stool pigeons for walking helplessly into the prepared trap, but decides to punish them and all future generations of their offspring for setting in motion something that Magic Man had clearly planned to occur all along.

So not only does Magic Man blame the two ethically incompetent stool pigeons for setting off the self-destruct mechanism, despite manifestly arranging for this to happen, but Magic Man then institutes a collective punishment of the sort that is seen in North Korea, and regarded universally by anyone with functioning neurons as the very antithesis of an ethical course of action. The talking snake also receives its share of collective punishment into the bargain, despite being demonstrated to be correct with respect to the matter of Magic Man lying to the stool pigeons about the consequences of the fruit munching.

If this was presented in the modern era to a publisher as a brand new work of fiction, it would cause the reviewers to wet themselves laughing. It would be regarded as a hilariously incompetent work on an epic scale. Yet, just because some Middle Eastern nomads wrote this bilge, and subsequently made conformity to its assertions a ruthlessly pursued policy, we are supposed to treat this farcical drivel as some sort of repository of wisdom, and accept assertions that would lead to the questioning of the sanity of anyone presenting them de novo in the present, in the absence of the requisite history.

The whole "fall" bilge is precisely that - bilge. It not only flatly contradicts known scientific fact on a ludicrously rococo scale, but as an ethical narrative, fails dismally on account of the manifest duplicity of the lead character, including the thoroughly psychotic punitive aftermath. That an entity behaving in this manner could be regarded as "good", let alone the source of all morality, constitutes the mother of all "WAT" moments. This isn't a "benevolent" father figure, it's a cosmic Kim Jong-Un, an ectoplasmic Donald Trump with all the narcissism and sociopathy turned up to Spinal Tap 11.

In an era where genetic manipulation via CRISPR, manned spaceflight and teraflop supercomputing are all engineering realities, that there exist people who still treat this moronic collection of bad myths as "sacred", is surely one of the most damning indictments of our species on the intellectual front.

I now await the entirely predictable erection of pathetic excuses for this, from the usual supernaturalist suspects once they view this.