Roasting the Chicken

 

There was an old "Readers Digest" story about a woman preparing to roast a chicken. She began by slicing off the legs of the bird and placing them in the roaster next to the chicken, but with the tips nestled under the chicken's wings.

Her daughter asked, "Why did you do that?"

"I don't know. My mom always did it that way."

 

They proceeded to call grandmother to find the answer. 

"I don't know. My mom always did it that way."

 

So, they called great-grandmother.

"My pot was too small."

 

I am reminded of this story as we think about all of the "core beliefs" of religions.

How many fundamental beliefs might have been developed over the centuries due to one person's need to position things upside-down in order for God to "fit" in their existing structure?

Specifically, I am convinced that the earliest notion that God removed Adam/Eve from Eden as punishment simply exists because the thought that "bad actions deserve punishment" is a "box" that carried over from some one person's view of justice.  What if that the story of Eden shows a God willing to move his pals away from the other dangerous fruits (the tree that grants eternal life) simply to make sure they don't live with the feeling of shame forever? What if removing them from the garden wasn't punitive but protective? How (differently) would that shape the rest of faith if THAT was the core belief?

I've read that account and re-read much of the "Old Testament" looking for:

• The first time God labels actions as "sin."
• The first time God claims that engaging in "sin" is an act that merits eternal punishment.
• The first time God demands any form of tribute for God's grace, compassion, love, or fellowship.

I may be mistaken. I may have missed something. But I'm pretty sure, it wasn't God who made those claims or demands.

 

I'm pretty sure, men cut off God's legs to make God better fit in their tiny pot.