A Pivotal Question For Those Who Believe The Bible

by bjc2read 19 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    What funkyderek wrote is what is expressed in the original Hebrew, without reading foreign concepts (like messianism or "Satan") into the text.

    The woman's zr` "seed" is simply her offspring. This is especially clear from 4:25, which looks back to 3:15 by designating Eve's child Seth (from whom Noah and everyone else is descended) as "another seed (zr` 'chr)" that God "has set for me" (sht-ly), cf. 3:15 where God says that "I am setting" ('shyt) enmity between the seeds (zr`) of the woman and the serpent. When referring to people, zr` is usually collectively used to refer to offspring (Exodus 32:13, 1 Kings 2:33, 11:39, Isaiah 1:4, 41:8, 43:5). The serpent's seed (zr`k "your seed" in 3:25) is similarly the serpent's offspring, i.e. the future progeny of this snake. Hence the curse is stating the etiological origin of the enmity or antagonism between humans and snakes (which is not present at all in the Eden narrative earlier in ch. 3, if you haven't noticed).

    This means that the serpent is viewed here as an animal which has offspring of its own. Of course, the preceding verse takes the serpent to be an animal, who would be made lower than "all cattle and every beast of the field" and which shall go "upon its belly and eat dust all the days of its life" (v. 14). The messianic protoevangelium interpretation assumes a switch of reference from a literal serpent (used by Satan) to Satan himself between v. 14 and v. 15, but this is not grammatically permissible. Neither is there any indication that the serpent is other than how the text presents it, i.e. as a talking serpent. There is no hint of ventriloquism or agency of another in the text (as there is in Numbers 22:28, for instance).

    The contrast between the two "broods" of the serpent and the woman is reminiscent of the contrast in 1 Kings 2:33, in which the word zr` is similarly used in its usual sense of "offspring": "Their blood shall therefore return upon the head of Joab and upon the head of his seed forever, but upon David and upon his seed and upon his house and upon his throne shall there be peace forever". The reference in Genesis 3:15 is not to a specific offspring but to humanity in general (as Eve is "the mother of all living," 3:20), who continue to be victim of snake bite to this day.

    The genesis of the messianic interpretation lies first in a post-exilic reading of text that construes the serpent as Satan or a fallen angel (cf. Wisdom 2:24, 1 Enoch 69:6, Life of Adam of Eve 16:3, 3 Baruch 9:7, Genesis Rabbah 22:12, b. Ber. 9b, etc.), and the progeny of the serpent as either an individual (Cain) or the collective generation (genea) of the wicked. Thus we read that "the seducing and beguiling serpent" defiled Eve's "maidenly purity" (4 Maccabees 18:6-11), that Eve "conceived by Sammael the angel of the Lord and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain" (Targum Ps.-Jonathan Genesis 4:1), that Eve "imbibed from the Evil One" and "conceived of the Devil's seed" (Tertullian, De Patientia 5.15), that Cain "was begotten in adultery for he was the child of the serpent" (Gospel of Philip 6:5-10), that "the serpent came into her and she became pregnant with Cain" (Pirqei de Rabbi Eliezer, 21). There is probably an allusion to this notion in 1 John 3:10-12 which states that Cain "was of the Evil One" and was among "the children of the Devil". The other "seed" was construed to be either the individual Seth (cf. Genesis 4:25, hence the Sethian gnostic focus on Seth as true seed of Eve and the founder of the gnostics), or collectively as the holy generation (genea), i.e. those who keep the commandments of God (cf. Frg. Targums P & VGenesis 3:15). This overall interpretation is foreign to the original text, as can best be seen in the tension between the "your seed (i.e. the serpent's seed)" and "seed of the woman" -- as this interpretation would make the serpent's seed necessarily the offspring of the woman Eve as well.

    The crucial element that gave rise to the messianic interpretation however is the (incorrect) use of the masculine pronoun autos "he" in the LXX of Genesis 3:15 instead of the neuter singular "it", and Paul was led similarly to a messianic understanding of the sperma "seed" of Abraham (originally understood collectively) in Galatians 3:16 (cf. Genesis 12:7, 13:15, 24:7). Paul seems to have a protevangelium understanding of Genesis 3:15 in his statement that "the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet" (Romans 16:20). While this expression assimilates the serpent to Satan, it interestingly has a dual understanding of the one crushing the head of the serpent in Genesis 3:15: both a collective entity ("your" feet, i.e. the Christian community) and a non-collective entity, i.e. God (who is performing the crushing of Satan through the feet of the collective church). This is not explicitly messianic and the collective presentation of the church accords with the Jewish reading of the text in Frg. Targums P & VGenesis 3:15. A semi-messianic interpretation appears in Revelation 12:1-17, which alludes to Genesis 3:15 in v. 9 and 17. The latter verse attests the Jewish non-messianic understanding of the women's seed (sperma autés "her seed") as those who collectively obey God's commandments, against whom the dragon/Satan wages war. The passage however also depicts the birth of the Messiah in v. 2-5 and describes the dragon as attacking the woman's child specifically. Here the Messiah is portrayed rather directly as the "seed" of the woman who will defeat the dragon (v. 11-12), an interpretation that co-exists with the collective reading of the source text. This dual understanding accords with the perspective of Revelation, which views the Christian community as acting together with Christ, "they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb" (v. 11). This passage also paves the way for the early Christian understanding of Mary as comparable to Eve (cf. Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.22.4, Tertullian, De Carne Christi 17.5), i.e. the "woman" in Genesis 3:15 being viewed as a different woman than Eve, specifically, Mary.

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    I agree with FunkyD's and Leo's answer. One must remember the separate books bible as we know it, have been selected by men who had an agenda to promote thier religious doctrine, therefore they rejected any books that strayed from the beleifs held in common by the councils that determined which book were to be part of the bible cannon. We make a serious mistake when we look at the bible as a collection of books that are all harmonious and in agreement. The belief in a Devil did not even exist when the book of genesis was written.

  • M.J.
    M.J.

    Interesting, Leolaia. Did any the early Church writers specifically interpret Gen 3:15 as the Messiah crushing Satan? It didn't look like that was the case from your post.

    In any case, I don't see why the WTS makes such a big deal about this verse. At best, it seems like a nice possible meaning to ponder.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    M.J. ...Yes, for instance, Irenaeus says that "Christ has therefore, in his work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head" (Adversus Haereses, 5.21.1). I can also quote liturgical sources like the early second century AD Odes of Solomon which presents the Messiah saying that God "overthrew by my hands the dragon with seven heads, and set me at his roots that I might destroy his seed" (22:5). Similarly, the late antiquity hymn Quem Pastores Laudavere says that "the star of Jacob now is risen, stills the longing heart's desire, break the ancient serpent's head, shatters hell's dark reign".

  • Vinny
    Vinny

    Leo, you could publish a bible commentary book. Seriously.

    Though I wouldn't mention anything about not believing in it...

    might hurt sales a bit...

    : )

  • bjc2read
    bjc2read

    Hi M.J.,

    Did any the early Church writers specifically interpret Gen 3:15 as the Messiah crushing Satan? It didn't look like that was the case from your post.
    In any case, I don't see why the WTS makes such a big deal about this verse. At best, it seems like a nice possible meaning to ponder.

    I agree. Also, none of the apostles of Jesus taught the messiah would "crush" Satan either. Paul specifically said that God (not the "seed" or messiah) would destroy or "crush" Satan. (Romans 16:20)

    For all who would like to get additional indepth information on this topic, please see the link below:

    http://www.singnewsong.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=224#224

    bjc

  • rnovello
    rnovello

    Have all you responders learned now that DonaldBurney is the new Jesus? You must pray to him. give him your money, after all he eats with Jehovah , and Jehovah tells him all. you must give up your homes your family and go to him. He is the seed of the woman that bj is trying to make you believe. may the true God have mercy on all of you who follow this demon into the pits of the abyss.

    rn

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    Technically J W's do not teach that Jesus is in himself the seed :

    * it-2 p. 889 Seed

    ***"Arrivalofthe"seed." Jesus, as has been established, is the primary "seed." However, he was not the ‘seed of the woman’ (that is, of "the Jerusalem above") at the time of his human birth. True, he was of the natural seed of Abraham, through his mother Mary; he was of the tribe of Judah; and both naturally through Mary and legally through his adoptive father Joseph, he was of the line of David. (Mt 1:1, 16; Lu 3:23, 31, 33, 34) So Jesus qualified according to the prophetic promises.

    But it was not until Jesus was begotten by the spirit, thus becoming a spiritual son of God, that he became the ‘seed of the woman’ and the Seed that was to bless all nations. This occurred at the time of his baptism by John in the Jordan River, 29 C.E. Jesus was then about 30 years of age. "

    If were still dubbing, I would say that the purpose was for the heavenly spirit Org Of God to produce a seed. Now it was already in existence as was the serpent and his seed. At the right time that Heavenly Org provided the one who came to Earth as a man and he then became the principle of the seed by Gods appointment in 29ce. He is later joined by 144000 others.

    So his preexistence does not matter. (If you chose to follow that belief)

  • Donnalilly
    Donnalilly

    how can anyone in their right mind believe burney is any type of savior , seed, or anything other than demonic?

  • bjc2read
    bjc2read

    Technically J W's do not teach that Jesus is in himself the seed

    Actually BluesBrother, your information is incorrect.

    In the w99 4/15 article entitled: The Only Way To Everlasting Life, the WTS makes the following plain statement in paragraph 7: "Who, therefore, is the "seed," or offspring, of the woman, mentioned at Genesis 3:15, that will bruise Satan "in the head," thus giving him a deathblow? It is the one whom God sent from heaven to be born miraculously of a virgin, yes, the man Jesus. (Matthew 1:18-23; John 6:38) Chapter 12 of Revelation reveals that as a resurrected heavenly Ruler, this Seed, Jesus Christ, would take the lead in the conquest of Satan and would establish, as Revelation 12:10 says, "the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ."

    ***

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit