You are making assumptions about what I am contending.
What makes you think that our physical wellbeing is the only 'happiness' possible?
Can you please show how that necessarily follows from what I said? You're making this confrontational where it doesn't need to be, as far as I'm concerned.
The "You call that Paradise?" was what in English we call a "Joke". It's related to the Italian gioco and it has to do with "playfulness". I commend the concept.
I was asking was about how, unless I misunderstand you, you are saying every difference among humans is a consequence of the Fall, so I was hoping for a refinement of that proposition in the light of what seems to me to be the indisputably Biblical assertion that the division of human-type personnel into sexes is part of God's notion before the Fall.
In this post you seem to think that a difference between this human and that human is inevitably a distraction from obeying the first and great commandment. I don't see how.
IN another post you say that personalities are results of the Fall. I don't see how.
What makes you think that our physical wellbeing is the only 'happiness' possible?
It SEEMS that you are suggesting that "physical well-being" (a pretty anaemic way of saying "making whoopie") is guaranteed to make us unhappy because it is essentially sinful or the result of sin. So Adam and Eve would not have enjoyed obedience to the command to be fruitful and multiply? (Heck, even San Francisco obeys the "be fruitful" part. No, wait. I think that's different.)
Notas mihi fecisti vias vitae;
adimplebis me laetitia cum vultu tuo:
delectationes in dextra tue usque ad finem.
Ps 16 (15) v 11
[got my Vulgate today]
"dextra tue" SHOULD BE "dextera tua". Ooops.
It's not confrontational. We were not created to "feel good about ourselves." We have however become very good at it.