On Sunday night I talked about re-imaging the story of Cain and Abel beyond the interaction of the two characters and into the story of humanity. Abel as the archetypal nomadic pastoralist. He represents the movement of the human race beyond their history as hunter-gatherers into the stage of raising livestock. No longer is Abel dependant on his ability to find edible food. He is now in control of his most basic need, that of food. He can move his flock from fertile area to fertile area.

In the story Cain becomes the archetypal agriculturalist. He is represents our movement towards advanced agrarian society. No longer is he moving from fertile area to fertile area to feed his flock, he is raising crops. He has become even less dependant on the circumstances around him to support his life and family. But along with that independence comes new responsibilities. He is now claiming ownership over his family, his animals and his land and with that comes the need to defend and protect his investment against those that might trespass and steal his crops for their own food or to feed their animals.

So as the story develops and Cain and Abel have words, “in Cain’s field” perhaps the story hints at the societal movement away from God. That as we become more and more independent of God we become less and less aware of the significance of each other to the point where we could murder each other in the defence of our possessions.

Even the story of Babel is an interesting part of the metaphor. As advanced agrarian society develops and surplus capacity begins to be used as currency small tribal communities begin to develop around the land of wealthy agriculturalists. Now the inherent significance we all enjoy as part of the creation of God is subverted in the pursuit of derived significance in the form of wealth, power and authority. A hierarchy of value develops with the wealthy at the top. In essence we begin to develop a model to represent who is more like God and who is less like God. Perhaps the Babel story of a tower to God represents more than just a physical structure but a societal hierarchy that attempts to place certain individuals closer to the divine.

Now imagine the early development of these tribal communities focused around the wealth of localized land owners. Eventually in the ongoing economic development of these communities they are forced to look outside of themselves. They develop of the need to connect and trade with other similar communities. And so as their grasp for ever increasing wealth and significance drives them, as they seek to have their closeness to God recognized by an ever increasing audience of worshipers they begin to run into the problem of language. Similarily developed communities have regional dialects and unique customs. Communication breaks down, fighting erupts and the movement towards replacing God is muted, for a time.

The point being that these stories have more significance to them in their reality as metaphor than they could as just factual events. Were these real people, in real time and space? Maybe, but that’s not the point. The stories have been chosen and preserved in the history of Israel because they are archetypal. They speak to us of more than the accidents of the narrative but also to the significance of the human journey. It’s not in the factual reality that they communicate something of truth to us. It is in their value as metaphorical symbols that their significance is realized.