Eve and the Serpent - Jews and Christians

[Samael_Khan]

He is an expression of temptation, and a prosecutor when we fall to temptation. He is the cop who is allowed to entrap us and the DA who prosecutes us when we let ourselves be trapped.

That is interesting. He is the bad cop. But he still works for the establishment.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Depend on how you interpret scripture:

2Pe 3:8 But don’t forget this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I consider that retconning because it isn't part of the original story.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Day year principle was predominantly used by the 7th day adventists and the Bahai's in the 19th century. It was Millerism first, where this guy called William Miller developed this idea of calculating two main bible prophecies to predict the advent of Jesus. This "advent" concept gave birth to the 7th day "adventists". You should search for "the great disappointment". Where this so called "national movement" had their great disappointment in the years 1843 to 1844 where their expected return of the Christ never happened. Much later, the man called Abdul Baha came and said that this prophecy was actually fulfilled. It was "Bahaullah".

Miller picked this up from old Jewish and to a higher degree, Christian guys who were taking this day year principle far too seriously, then it kept going until finally Abdul Baha takes this all, mixes everything, adds even a lunar year into it in order to make bahaullah the second coming of Jesus.

Its a great tool really. A lot of people used it. Most of them used it post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Interesting stuff.

I am very familiar with the 7th Day Adventists. I read the Great Controvercy by Ellen White before I became a Christian and watched Revelation Seminars by Walter Veith. That got me into the whole Satan conspiracy that lead me to Christianity. There interpretations are so complex that I have forgotten a lot of them.

I cannot remember the Day to Year principle specifically because there are so many other numbers involved in their interpretations.

I figured that Abdul Baha had a link to the Millerites. At the time of Miller many groups were influenced by him, including the Bible Students, who the Jehovah's Witnesses are an offshoot of, whose leader was influenced by 2nd Adventists who were influenced by Miller. I have a strong suspicion that all the New Religious movements that came out of the 1800's were influenced by him.

It is a great tool and very interesting. These number prophecies have been used as tools for many denominations.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Well if you want the serpent to be the good guy that much then no one can stop you. But the fact is Eve did die and so did Adam. So the serpent caused their death and if you want the Biblical perspective ... he caused the death of every human being that comes afterwards.

That is the NT perspective not OT.

Who said that Eve and Adam were immortal to begin with?

 

[thomas t]

God punished The Serpent for revealing the truth.

that's a retcon.
Nowhere in the text does it say that God punished it for that reason.
God punishes it. But for not for that reason.
Satan and Eve had a conversation and that conversation lead Eve to sin.

I think the story is anything but hogwash, and you best understand it literally.

 

[thomas t]

Leaving a bottle full of poison in the middle of a room, completely accessible to kids, is also a sort of criminal behavior.

ciao

- viole

To me, this comparison is quite a stretch.
They were at least youths, I think. They could take big decisions, so this may indicate that they were quite old already.

If the poison is so dangerous, .... why did Adam leave it as it was? He could have erected a large fence around it, for instance.
He made a mistake. Maybe I would have made the same kind of mistake though...

 

[Samael_Khan]

that's a retcon.
Nowhere in the text does it say that God punished it for that reason.
God punishes it. But for not for that reason.
Satan and Eve had a conversation and that conversation lead Eve to sin.

I think the story is anything but hogwash, and you best understand it literally.

Saying that the serpent is Satan is an NT retcon.

It is through implication of the text. If it can be concluded that the Serpent told Eve the truth, and the serpent telling Eve the truth displeased God because it led to Eve committing a "sin", then God punished the serpent for telling Eve the truth.

Why should I "best understand it literally"?

 

[firedragon]

I am very familiar with the 7th Day Adventists. I read the Great Controvercy by Ellen White before I became a Christian and watched Revelation Seminars by Walter Veith. That got me into the whole Satan conspiracy that lead me to Christianity. There interpretations are so complex that I have forgotten a lot of them.

I cannot remember the Day to Year principle specifically because there are so many other numbers involved in their interpretations.

I figured that Abdul Baha had a link to the Millerites. At the time of Miller many groups were influenced by him, including the Bible Students, who the Jehovah's Witnesses are an offshoot of, whose leader was influenced by 2nd Adventists who were influenced by Miller. I have a strong suspicion that all the New Religious movements that came out of the 1800's were influenced by him.

It is a great tool and very interesting. These number prophecies have been used as tools for many denominations.

Yes I agree with you.

 

[Samael_Khan]

To me, this comparison is quite a stretch.
They were at least youths, I think. They could take big decisions, so this may indicate that they were quite old already.

If the poison is so dangerous, .... why did Adam leave it as it was? He could have erected a large fence around it, for instance.
He made a mistake. Maybe I would have made the same kind of mistake though...

The comparison is quite accurate. Children tend to do what you tell them not to do.

But the naivety comes from their lack of life experience, much like with children. So they get an idea in their head and do it, or someone gives them suggestions and they follow through with them.

Thing is, God didn't have to leave the tree in the middle of the garden. But he did and they got into trouble.

A lot of us would do the same thing depending on our personalities. Some would be naughty and do it. Others would be too scared and trust our guardians completely.

 

[Clara Tea]

Technically the serpent didn't lie to Eve.

1. Eve didn't die by eating the fruit. Nowhere in the account is her death recorded. We do not know when she died.

2. The Serpent was right that by eating the fruit, Eve would be like God, knowing good and evil. Even God agreed, which is why he stopped them from eating from the tree of life.

God punished The Serpent for revealing the truth.

.

Serpents in the Bible - Wikipedia

The serpent was not originally a snake. God turned it into a snake as punishment for tempting Adam and Eve to sin.

Link above says: "The symbol of a serpent or snake played important roles in religious and cultural life of ancient Egypt, Canaan, Mesopotamia and Greece. The serpent was a symbol of evil power and chaos from the underworld as well as a symbol of fertility, life and healing"

As such, it was not reviled, but sometimes worshiped or called upon if it was needed.

It is sometimes referred to as a dragon monster (according to the link above).

The dragon mentioned in Revelation comes from the bottomless pit of hell, and it occupied a president of the most powerful nation in the world (United States, if you believe Revelation 17:18), and that president attacked Iraq (as did his son, the beast).

However, Satan had been known as the dragon. But, in heaven, there was one who spoke as the dragon spoke, but that one was cast into hell by Satan. It is that one, from the bottomless pit of hell that attacked Iraq in recent times (not Satan).

Revelation says that there will be many beasts. So, there are many entities that are evil in the world.

Many cultures talk about the dragon, and most are about the dragon destroying the world. For example, the Mayan calendar (which is the same as the old Olmec calendar) ends in modern times (the exact date of ending is not known by modern scientists because they have the date slightly wrong).

I believe that the Olmec also had Blacks and Asians (from the statues that they left behind....for example, the giant heads of the Olmec look African, yet, there are some Chinese figurines. The date of the Olmec culture seems to date from 1,400 BC, which is the time when the Solutrean civilization disbanded, and the Solutreans, despite being in central Europe, were African.

A later South American civilization (Aztec) had a dragon God that was said to end the world (Kukulkhan....the date of the God and the name are similar to a Chinese emperor, Kubla Khan). It is known, now, that the Chinese had contact with the Americas in pre-Columbia times. Proof of that contact is from settlements in Alaska with Chinese artifcts (such as forged bronze).

What I'm getting at is that many cultures of the world talk about a dragon God destroying the world. Both Bush presidents took office in the Chinese year of the dragon. So, they were both dragon presidents.

Obviously, Eve didn't die by eating the forbidden fruit of knowledge. For that crime, Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden (in Iraq, between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in a region now bombed out by the recent Iraq war). After being kicked out of Eden, Adam and Eve went on to populate the world.

 

[viole]

To me, this comparison is quite a stretch.
They were at least youths, I think. They could take big decisions, so this may indicate that they were quite old already.

If the poison is so dangerous, .... why did Adam leave it as it was? He could have erected a large fence around it, for instance.
He made a mistake. Maybe I would have made the same kind of mistake though...

Could be. But my reply was addressed to someone who compared them to children.

But one thing we know for sure: they were logically not in the position to know what is right and what is wrong. By definition, since the idea of the tree was to acquire that knowledge.

Then why punish them? No civilised country would punish a citizen that is intellectually incapable to make moral decisions.

And given that they have been created without that knowledge, what does it mean that they have been created in the image of God? If that is not meant that God is also a primate, then it must signify some spiritual property. It is not moral judgement, for what we have seen. So, what was it?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kenny]

Technically the serpent didn't lie to Eve.

Technically, he did

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”

Did God say that?

Technically, the lie was in the question.

However, through ignorance, she fell for the lie as he had a hook in the bait.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Well...you mean...as if God was the impartial judge of a Court, whereas Satan was the prosecutor...in a penal trial?
It does make sense, btw.

Maybe look at like this. One concept of free will that exists in Torath Mosheh and Orthodox Judaism is that you can choose between a path that is benifiical to you and a path that is not benificial. i.e.by being human you have the power to choose either path.

The satan(lowercase) is an expression of reality that allows humans to choose a path that is not beneficial - if the person wants to choose that path. It varies from person to person and also allows us to not be robots.

So, to take your example I will adjust it a bit.

1. The Source of creation, Hashem is the Judge.
2. The human being is both the defendant and the prosecutor.
   
3. Human choices are the evidence and the witnesses.
4. The ultimate goal of the Judge and the court is to benefit the human being prior to the court case, during the court case, and after the court case.
5. The Judge has created a situation where the court, and the reality of an eventual court case, can benefit the human being, before/during/after the court case - if the person wants it.
6. The satan/lowercase are the circumstances/reality/elements of human choice that allows the human to choose to not benefit from the court, before/during/after the court case, or to reduce the person's benefit - IF a person chooses not to beneifit (at various levels).
   • If a person wants the court to give them benefit, at various levels, from a life directed on the truth - a person, by being human, can freely choose that path and reject the satan (at various levels) and receive that benfit.
   • If a person wants to have all of the benefits before the court case, for the little bit of good they did and plan on doing, and they want to lose everything due to their higher level of bad actions before the court, they can receive that.
   • If a person wants to walk into the court with nothing, take part in the court case with nothing, and end the case with nothing, then they can have that.
   • If a person wants to ignore the fact that a court exists and that there is a date for the case, the they can choose this path.
   • The satan/lowercase is an aspect of reality, for each person, which allows the human to choose or reject any of the above, and other possibilities, based on what they want.

I hope that helps.

 

[thomas t]

It is through implication of the text. If it can be concluded that the Serpent told Eve the truth, and the serpent telling Eve the truth displeased God because it led to Eve committing a "sin", then God punished the serpent for telling Eve the truth.

it wasn't a "sin". It was a sin.
If I tell you the truth but you misunderstand and you later go and murder someone because of what I told you,
leaving you under a false impression of things would have been guilty, too.

Yeah, technically the content of the mere words of what was said by the serpent was right...
But Eve understood wrong.

Why should I "best understand it literally"?

because God wants to be understood, I think.
If I ask you "want a cake?" you would understand just naturally that I offer you a cake. Noone would start thinking of me being very metaphorical telling you to go on a trip next month or whatever.

If you want to go deeper and find potential metaphorical meanings, you can search for potential metaphorical meanings also.

The comparison is quite accurate. Children tend to do what you tell them not to do.

that does not mean that anyone who disobeys necessarily is a child.
They are no children.
All else would be a retcon.

Thing is, God didn't have to leave the tree in the middle of the garden. But he did and they got into trouble.

Of course the pastor also didn't have to leave the Bible in the church.
I used it to beat someone else, but I was told not to. But I did, and in the end I got into trouble for it?

You can always use things in a way you are not supposed to.
In my opinion, there is no need to blame God here.

 

[thomas t]

But one thing we know for sure: they were logically not in the position to know what is right and what is wrong. By definition, since the idea of the tree was to acquire that knowledge.

here we disagree.
They knew what was wrong. They had this knowledge. This is at least my interpretation of the story.
God would not have demanded something they didn't know nuts about.

The tree of knowledge means something else, in my opinion.
It's rather the tree of knowledge to make a disctinction between good and ... evil in a sense of "bad". It wasn't right and wrong.

This is at least my impression from the word used. Strong's Hebrew: 7451. רָע (ra') -- adversity

 

[Estro Felino]

Maybe look at like this. One concept of free will that exists in Torath Mosheh and Orthodox Judaism is that you can choose between a path that is benifiical to you and a path that is not benificial. i.e.by being human you have the power to choose either path.

The satan(lowercase) is an expression of reality that allows humans to choose a path that is not beneficial - if the person wants to choose that path. It varies from person to person and also allows us to not be robots.

So, to take your example I will adjust it a bit.

1. The Source of creation, Hashem is the Judge.
2. The human being is both the defendant and the prosecutor.
   
3. Human choices are the evidence and the witnesses.
4. The ultimate goal of the Judge and the court is to benefit the human being prior to the court case, during the court case, and after the court case.
5. The Judge has created a situation where the court, and the reality of an eventual court case, can benefit the human being, before/during/after the court case - if the person wants it.
6. The satan/lowercase are the circumstances/reality/elements of human choice that allows the human to choose to not benefit from the court, before/during/after the court case, or to reduce the person's benefit - IF a person chooses not to beneifit (at various levels).
   • If a person wants the court to give them benefit, at various levels, from a life directed on the truth - a person, by being human, can freely choose that path and reject the satan (at various levels) and receive that benfit.
   • If a person wants to have all of the benefits before the court case, for the little bit of good they did and plan on doing, and they want to lose everything due to their higher level of bad actions before the court, they can receive that.
   • If a person wants to walk into the court with nothing, take part in the court case with nothing, and end the case with nothing, then they can have that.
   • If a person wants to ignore the fact that a court exists and that there is a date for the case, the they can choose this path.
   • The satan/lowercase is an aspect of reality, for each person, which allows the human to choose or reject any of the above, and other possibilities, based on what they want.

I hope that helps.

Thank you, that was very informative

 

[viole]

It's rather the tree of knowledge to make a disctinction between good and ... evil in a sense of "bad". It wasn't right and wrong.

Is there something, morally speaking, that can be wrong and good, or something that can be right and evil?

Ciao

- viole

 

[BilliardsBall]

Technically the serpent didn't lie to Eve.

1. Eve didn't die by eating the fruit. Nowhere in the account is her death recorded. We do not know when she died.

2. The Serpent was right that by eating the fruit, Eve would be like God, knowing good and evil. Even God agreed, which is why he stopped them from eating from the tree of life.

God punished The Serpent for revealing the truth.

So says the devils advocate...

Things that I don't care about:
- Proof texting. Rather focus on context. I hate retcons.
- Other biblical books besides the Torah/Pentateuch.
- Your faith. I care about what the text says.

I am very interested in hearing Jewish interpretation of these verse.

Jewish and Christian commentaries are allowed.

Note: Changed Satan to Serpent.

The point is Satan's biggest lies are half-truths, like "eat this and you won't die physically (just spiritually inside and feel guilty instantly, and run to hide your nakedness).

Another is "this next drink/fornication/porn/gamble/marriage/divorce won't KILL you".

Here's one, "God won't kill you the moment you mock Him on a Forum".

 

[Fallen Prophet]

I'll take a crack at it.

Technically the serpent didn't lie to Eve.

I disagree - but let's get into it.

1. Eve didn't die by eating the fruit. Nowhere in the account is her death recorded. We do not know when she died.

Unless you are making the claim that Eve is still walking among us as an immortal - this point is moot.

Even if the Biblical record does not record her death - we can assume that she did in fact die - since so many other deaths - of her husband and children - were recorded.

The Biblical record mentions many people and does not record their deaths. Should we assume they never died?

The actual wording of God concerning the partaking of the fruit was (King James),

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:17)

What is a "day" to God? - We do not know - other than it is a period of time with a discernible beginning and end.

Either way - it is clear that He did not claim that Adam would die the moment he partook of the fruit - but that he would eventually die within this period of time of which we cannot determine.

Therefore - the serpent did lie - because he/it claimed that Eve "shall not surely die" (Genesis 3:4) - when all evidence points to the fact that she did eventually die sometime more than likely within this "day" - or period of time with a discernible beginning and end - that God mentioned.

2. The Serpent was right that by eating the fruit, Eve would be like God, knowing good and evil. Even God agreed, which is why he stopped them from eating from the tree of life.

The serpent telling one truth does not negate the lie that he/it told.

God punished The Serpent for revealing the truth.

I believe that it is clear that God punished the serpent not only for lying to Eve about her not dying if she partook of the fruit but also for his/its participation in violating God's expressed command.

 

[thomas t]

Is there something, morally speaking, that can be wrong and good, or something that can be right and evil?

Ciao

- viole

yeah. If you use money to bribe others, it's good for you (you get the contract), but it is also evil.