[BretLudwig]

Faussettes Genesis
By
Robert E. Reis

"An introduction to €œThe Book of Genesis from a Darwinian
Perspective€� by Rich Faussette, 8 Vol. 7, No. 2 The Occidental
Quarterly

Richard Faussette was inspired to reevaluate the Book of Genesis when he
noticed that Charles Darwin had observed that man had harnesses natural
selection in the first book of the Hebrew Bible.

Faussette discerned that a Darwinian thread connected the Adam and Eve,
Jacob and Esau, and the Joseph in Egypt stories.

He asserts that the entire evolutionary group strategy of the Jewish
genetic clustering of the Middle Eastern genetic clustering of the non -
European genetic clustering of the Caucasian genetic clustering €œwas
collapsed into this single book hidden beneath the allegories but in plain
sight once you had the proper perspective.€�

Mr. Faussette treats the stories in Genesis as allegories, i.e. the
expression by means of symbolic fictional figures and actions of truths or
generalizations about human existence.

What is the allegory of Adam and Eve really about?

He reminds that current scientific view of human evolution tells that
€œaround four million years ago mans hominid ancestors left the safety
of the jungle canopy for the open African savannas. Over countless
generations they evolved to walk upright on two legs. Once their hands
were free and they could manipulate objects skillfully, mans ancestors
made tools and began to learn sophisticated survival strategies...When a
number of individuals were required to manufacture and deploy an effective
tool or mount an effective strategy, again over countless generations, our
ancestors evolved speech to facilitate communications. They learned to
tolerate one another in greater numbers in their efforts to organize and
defend themselves from other groups of early men.
The escalating conflict caused by the freeing of the hands for technology
naturally selected for bigger brains that could juggle more behavioral
alternatives. The behavioral repertoire expanded rapidly. As the
behavioral repertoire expanded, man found himself consciously choosing
from among a growing number of behavioral alternatives and his unique
sense of self emerged, a consequence of having to consciously juggle many
behavioral alternatives in his struggle for survival.€�

Genesis tells us that when Adam and Eve ate the fruit from the €œtree of
the knowledge of good and evil€� the €œeyes of both of them were opened
and they discovered that they were naked; so they stitched fig-leaves
together and made loincloths and hid from the Lord God.€�

Faussette infers that the Adam and Eve story reflects the recognition that
mankind had moved from one state of conscious to another. From a hominid
that lacked a sense of self, we had been transformed into the sole
creature on this planet that felt shame. He emphasizes, €œWithout a sense
of self, what would one be ashamed of?€�

From hominids who instinctively knew what to do like the other animal,
mankind had been thrust into a novel state of consciousness. €œAn
organism that behaves instinctively cannot behave otherwise and does not
make conscious mistakes. On the other hand, if you rely on acquired
behaviors you have learned, you must consciously choose from among many
possible behavioral alternatives in any given situation. You are prone to
error and your awareness of that fact generates ontological anxiety.€�

By venturing beyond the borders of instinct mankind was condemned to make
conscious choices based upon what he had learned. For Faussette the
ability to make wrong choices is ability to sin. Sin is making a wrong
choice.

The Jewish patriarchs were shepherds. Charles Darwin observed that these
men had domesticated, bred their animals and learned to manipulate the
reproductive differences in their flocks from generation to generation.
Families that acquired significant knowledge and passed that knowledge
down to their sons tended to survive and prosper. Families that failed to
acquire and instill in their sons the knowledge of what were fast becoming
€œadaptive disciplines€� did not.

Faussette points out the evolutionary implications of the story of Jacob
and Esau. Isaac and Rebecca have two sons. The older son acts
unintelligently be allowing his younger brother to obtain his birthright
for a bowl of soup and violates the ethnocentrism of Judaism by later
marrying a Hittite woman.

Later Rebecca and the younger son Jacob deceive Isaac into giving his
final blessing to Jacob instead of to Esau.

Deceit, deception, treachery and fraud are rewarded. Cleverness trumps
honesty.

Rebecca sends Jacob to live with a relative so that he will not be tempted
to take a wife outside the tribe like his dimmer witted brother.

Jacob wanted to marry Rachel, the younger daughter of Laban, but is
tricked into working for fourteen years before his gets her. He also is
forced to marry Leah her older and €œdull-eyed€� sister.

Faussette summarizes his finding up to this point.

€œWe have determined from the story of Adam and Eve that mans fall
from grace was a result of his evolutionary transition from instinct to
learned behavior. From that we deduced that religion is mans attempt to
learn as much as he can for as long as he lives until learning becomes
intuitive and a man can stand in the presence of God without fear. In the
story of Jacob and Esau the birthright goes to the most cunning and
intelligent, the one €œclosest to God,€� just as God predicted in an
appearance to Rebecca who participates in her son Jacobs treachery.
Having won the birthright, Jacob dutifully obeys his mother and goes to
Harran to find a wife among her relatives. Laban cunningly substitutes the
dull-eyed Leah for Jacobs first choice, the younger and more vivacious
Rachel. The substitution reintroduces the theme of the elder and the
younger. The elder Leah is dull-eyed, as the elder Esau was careless.
Whereas Rebecca had schemed to have the younger, cleverer Jacob obtain the
birthright, Laban arranges to have the older, duller Leah marry Jacob. It
is the same switch€”in reverse. If Leah is truly dull-eyed, and the
principles of selection were at that early period attended to as Darwin
and Genesis tell us, then Jacob expects the offspring of Leah to inherit
the dull eyes of their mother along with the birthright. He also knows
that Rachels sons, though gifted with their mothers vigor and better
suited for leadership, are destined to follow. It would at first appear
that the less intelligent gain the advantages while the more intelligent
are denied them, which is just the opposite of what had transpired between
Jacob and Esau.€�

Jacob worked the seven extra years for Rachel while wreaking his vengeance
on Laban. Jacob deliberately weakens Labans flocks. He breeds only the
less vigorous animals in Labans flocks while breeding the most vigorous
animals in his own. By forcing Jacob to marry a dull-eyed wife first, Laban
had weakened Jacobs human flock. The son of a dull-eyed woman would
procure the birthright and title of patriarch and will rule over Jacobs
next generation

Jacob knew he could select for desired traits in his flocks. Why would he
not believe that human could also by bred for valuable selectable traits
that could be passed down from generation to generation?

Faussette believes that his Darwinian interpretation of the allegory of
Adam and Eve entails that €œintelligence must always prevail in the
Bible.€�

For Faussette, €œ[t]he Darwinian truth of the matter would be borne out
in the progeny of Leah and Rachel.€�

Reuben, the first-born of the dull-eyed Leah, defiles his fathers
concubine. Simeon and Levi the next two sons of Leah have spades that
become weapons of violence. Their father curses them. Judah, next son of
Leah, sells Joseph, Rachels first born into slavery, and marries a
Canaanite woman.

The son of vivacious Rachel is Joseph, rightful bearer of the birthright
in Gods eyes and Jacobs eyes. Joseph rises to become counselor to
the pharaoh. Joseph becomes a prince among his brothers and his brothers
become subject to him€”and the elders serve the younger.

The son and the grandsons of the vivacious Rachel have become the equals
of the firstborn of the dull-eyed Leah. €œGods Law is immutable. The
allegory of the elder serving the younger is three generations deep.
Intelligence is passed down from generation to generation, and
intelligence prevails over birthright.€�

Faussettes errors when he states that the Jewish God €œdoes indeed favor
the learned.€�

The defining quality Faussette ascribes to Isaac, Jacob, Rebecca, Laban,
Rachel, and Joseph is €œcunning€�, not intelligence.

What is cunning? It is skill in deception. Its synonyms include trickery,
intrigue, slyness, deception and guile. Cunning implies an inclination
toward deceit, slyness, and trickery. Cunning implies a shrewd, often
instinctive skill in concealing or disguising the real purposes of ones
actions.

I agree with Mr. Faussette that the Jewish Bible reveals knowledge that
human families like sheep can be bred for specific traits. But the trait
favored by the Jewish God is not intelligence or learning, but cunning.

The Jewish patriarchs religiously pursued a eugenic policy to achieve a
desired outcome. For Faussette, the goal was €œgreater intelligence€�,
for me the obvious goal was guile.

I recommend that the complete article be read by the Majority Rights
community. "

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/...ettes_genesis/

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html