"The Serpent of Eden" or "Paradi...

by Atreyu 8 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Atreyu
    Atreyu

    "The Serpent of Eden" or "Paradise Lost"

    Some have discussed the meaning of the account in Genesis 3, about the serpent. A pivot question has been: Who lied, the serpent or Jehovah?

    Please bear in mind that the account in Genesis 3 is not an eyewitness account. According to JW, Moses wrote Genesis. According to most scholars, Genesis was compiled by king Solomons priestly scribes. Anyway, this is a narrative that got the present form many centuries after any actual incident in the Garden of Eden. The narrator, whoever it was, may of course have had access to older written sources that are lost today.

    Please also bear in mind that the names Satan or Devil are not mentioned at all in Genesis, not even in the Pentateuch. In fact, we can only find these names in the latest of the Hebrew texts.

    The rise of Satan

    We can find the word satan a few places in the Hebrew Scriptures, but mostly, the word does not refer to a certain being, as a name, but as a common noun, meaning resister, accuser or adversary. The context shows, in most places, that a human being is referred to. Even JW admit this. See for instance 2 Sam 19:22; 1 King 5:4; 11:14,23,25 (All scriptural references are to New World Translation. See also footnotes in the Reference Edition.)

    One of the few clear references to Satan, as a being or angel, in the Hebrew Scriptures are found in Job 1. But the book of Job is a quite late book, definitely post-exile. (JW claim that Moses is the author, but they are the only one to claim this.)

    Another reference to Satan is found in Zech 3:1,2, also a post-exile book. Here, Satan occurs with a definite article, but it is still not a proper name. The meaning is most likely the accuser and the setting is also a kind of a court, where this accuser plays his role.

    A curiosity: Look up 1 Chron 21:1. This seems like a reference to a personal Satan, doesnt it? Then, look up the parallel account in 2 Sam 24:1. Here, Jehovah himself is the accuser. This might be shocking to anyone who believes in the absolute integrity of the Bible. My point is this: The Chronicles are written post exile, much later than 2 Samuel, at a time when the Jews had an idea of Satan as an evil angel, an idea that didnt exist before the Babylonian exile.

    (For those of you that dont know this: It is common historical knowledge that the Jews accepted the ideas of angels and of Satan as Jehovahs adversary after the exile, influenced by Persian religion. In the 2 nd century before Christ, this belief was manifest among some of the Jewish fractions. Remember that at the time of Jesus, the Pharisees did believe in the existence of angels, but the Sadducees rejected this teaching.)

    Another interesting point is that an apocryphical Hebrew book, The Book of Wisdom, says in 2:23,24: For God created human beings to be immortal, he made them as an image of his own nature; Death came into the world only through the Devils envy, as those who belong to him find to their cost. This is in fact very close to the Christian belief about Satan, sin and salvation, and this book was also accepted and used by the early church fathers. But, since JW rarely refer to apocryphical books in support for their views, they have a hard time finding support for the belief in Satan as an angel and Jehovahs adversary in the Hebrew canon.

    Back to Eden

    With the above in mind, please understand that the narrator of Genesis 3 did not speak a single word about Satan or the Devil.

    Now, please read through the account from Genesis 2:16 and all of Genesis 3, and think about what it really says. Think about what that ancient narrator wanted to tell us.

    So, did you do it? And . did you maybe think Who lied, the serpent or Jehovah?

    Lies?

    To me, it is not a matter of who lied and who did not. Maybe both lied? Maybe both said the truth? Maybe the serpent was partly right and Jehovah partly wrong?

    Consider this:

    The serpent said: For God knows that in the very day of your eating from it your eyes are bound to be opened and you are bound to be like God, knowing good and bad. Was this a lie? Apparently not. In v22 we read: And Jehovah God went on to say: Here the man has become like us in knowing good and bad

    Jehovah said: for in the day you eat from it you will positively die. Was this a lie? Maybe, maybe not. At least, Adam and Eve eventually died, But Jehovah did not mention that 1000 years = 1 day. And he did not mention that he meant some sort of a spiritual death. On the other hand, the serpent promised that the result of eating the fruit would show up the very same day, that they would be like God. And, as seen above, this really happened.

    Remember that Adam and Eve never were promised eternal life by neither Jehovah nor Satan. It was only a question of die or not die after eating the fruit. The question of eternal life arose later, when Jehovah prevented Adam and Eve from eating from The Tree of Life by expelling them from the garden of Eve.

    A puppeteer?

    Some have argued that the serpent couldnt have been only a serpent, that Satan must have been the one who pulled the strings.

    Consider this:

    Gen 3:1 says that the serpent proved to be the most cautious of all the wild beasts. If this was just a stupid snake acting as a puppet for Satan, how could it be described as cautious?

    Gen 3:14 says: And Jehovah God proceeded to say to the serpent: Because you have done this thing, you are the cursed one Why should Jehovah punish a snake, when Satan was the one to blame?

    Cherubs and sword

    Some might argue that angels actually are mentioned in Gen 3:24, when speaking of the cherubs guarding the way to The Tree of Life. To say that cherubs are a sort of angels is a gross misunderstanding. Actually, the whole idea of cherubs is borrowed from Babylonian mythology, where cherubs were called karibu. These were half-human, half-animal spirits guarding the gates of temples and palaces. In the Biblical account the cherubs are portrayed as winged creatures. The first occurrence of cherubs in connection with the worship of Jehovah is the Ark of the Covenant. (1 Sam 4:4)

    One evil question: Who invented the sword?

    Well, if you believe that the account of Gen 3 relates to historical facts, it must have been Jehovah, since he posted the cherubs and a sword to guard The Tree of Life.

    To, me it shows that this is a narrative put together by a man with good intentions, but not being aware of this gross anachronism.

    The meaning of the account

    The mainline is about how chaos came into a perfect world, how lust (they realized their nakedness), pain and labour started. It also describes mans tendency to act independent of God. The beings to blame were Adam, Eve and the serpent. Satan was never in question, since the narrator never had any idea about any angel that acted as an adversary to Jehovah.

  • plmkrzy
    plmkrzy
    Gen 3:1 says that the serpent proved to be the most cautious of all the wild beasts. If this was just a stupid snake acting as a puppet for Satan, how could it be described as cautious?

    Are you saying that snakes are not cautious creatures? Ok IT WAS A REAL SNAKE. In fact, I talk to snakes all the time. The ones at the pet stores, they really hate being couped up in those small aquairums and being fed a mouse every week. They want to be freeeeeeeee!

    And maybe the serpent was really Eves inner voice talking to her. and Satan was reading her mind and HE is the real author.

    Why should Jehovah punish a snake, when Satan was the one to blame?

    Where does it say that Jehovah punished or cursed snakes? LITTERALLY

    These are not very interesting points. There not even points.

    First of all you use the term "narrator" when speaking about the book of Geneses. And if we don't know if the writer was copying from other writings or making notes of his dreams or happened upon a book and re-wrote it then narrated it, how are we suppose to GUESS what the intentions are. Or even for that matter that there were even ANY intentions at all?

    Before you can accurately dictate What the intentions are, or if there were any, you need to first identify the source. We can do the very same thing with Fairy Tails. Just pretend there is a guestion of who thr real author was and go for it.

    Sorry to be so nitpicky but this is getting old.

  • plmkrzy
    plmkrzy

    How did you post the same topic twice and do it in only 2 min.? Do you hit post twice real fast? Or do you have to copy and paste the entire post?

  • Atreyu
    Atreyu

    <P>Hi pzxyyz - or what ever,</P> <DIV class=quote><STRONG>Are you saying that snakes are not cautious creatures?</STRONG></DIV> <P>Of course we can describe snakes as cautious, in some respect, but isn't this merely a human feature, that takes some cognitive capacity? And my point - what is the purpose of describing the serpent as cautious if it was only a puppet for someone behind the stage?</P> <DIV class=quote> <P>Where does it say that Jehovah punished or cursed snakes? LITTERALLY</P></DIV> <P>Gen 3:14 says clearly that Jehovah cursed the serpent.</P> <DIV class=quote> <P><FONT face=ARIAL>First of all you use the term "narrator" ; when speaking about the book of Geneses. And if we don't know ;if the writer was copying from other writings or making notes of his dreams or happened upon a book and re-wrote it then narrated it, how are we suppose to GUESS what the intentions are. Or even for that matter that </FONT><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #003300; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'"><FONT face=ARIAL size=3>there were even ANY intentions at all?</FONT></SPAN> <P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #003300; FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'"><FONT face=ARIAL size=3>Before you can accurately dictate What the intentions are, or if there were any, you need to first identify the source. We can do the very same thing with <FONT face=ARIAL><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #003300; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT face=ARIAL size=6><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #003300; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Fairy Tails</SPAN></FONT></SPAN>.</FONT> Just pretend there is a guestion of who thr real author was and go for it.</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV> <P>This is ;rather complicated to answer. In short, allmost all scholars agree that we don't know the original sources of the accounts in Genesis. We don't even know the name of the narrator(s). But most agree that Genesis was compiled by king Solomon's priestly scribes. Their intentions was to support the worship of Jehovah (we know this through studies of the political and religious situation in Israel at the time of Solomon), and that's why they put together narratives (!) to serve their purpose. And that's why I use the word "narrator" - the story was written (or compiled) with some clear intentions.</P> <P>Tech corner:</P> <P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT face=ARIAL>For some reason unknown to me, special characters like these have been removed from my article: , : Please apologize!</FONT></SPAN></P> <P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT face=ARIAL></FONT></SPAN> ;</P> <P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT face=ARIAL>And I don't know why my original post showed up twice.</FONT></SPAN></P>
  • Atreyu
    Atreyu

    Hi plm,

    Are you saying that snakes are not cautious creatures?

    They may be described as cautious, but they are not cautious in the way human beings are. This takes some cognitive capacity that snakes doesn't posses. And what is the point in describing the serpent as "cautious" if it was a mere puppet for someone behind the stage?

    Where does it say that Jehovah punished or cursed snakes? LITTERALLY

    Gen 3:14

    First of all you use the term "narrator" when speaking about the book of Geneses. And if we don't know if the writer was copying from other writings or making notes of his dreams or happened upon a book and re-wrote it then narrated it, how are we suppose to GUESS what the intentions are. Or even for that matter that there were even ANY intentions at all?

    Before you can accurately dictate What the intentions are, or if there were any, you need to first identify the source. We can do the very same thing with Fairy Tails. Just pretend there is a guestion of who thr real author was and go for it.

    This is a rather complicated question. Almost all scholars agree that we don't know the sources or the narrator(s) of Genesis, but most scholars agree that Genesis was compiled by king Solomon's priestly scribes. Their intentions were to favor the worship of Jehovah in a period of political and religious unrest in Israel. Whe know this through many historical sources.

    This is why I use the term "narrator", they had a clear purpose when they compiled Genesis. We may not know the name of the narrator(s), nor the sources, but we can picture his (their) intentions to some extent.

    Tech corner:

    For some reason unknown to me, special characters like these have been removed from my article: , : Please apologize!

    And I don't know why my post showed up twice.

  • Atreyu
    Atreyu

    Hi plm,

    Are you saying that snakes are not cautious creatures?

    They may be described as cautious, but they are not cautious in the way human beings are. This takes some cognitive capacity that snakes doesn't posses. And what is the point in describing the serpent as "cautious" if it was a mere puppet for someone behind the stage?

    Where does it say that Jehovah punished or cursed snakes? LITTERALLY

    Gen 3:14

    First of all you use the term "narrator" when speaking about the book of Geneses. And if we don't know if the writer was copying from other writings or making notes of his dreams or happened upon a book and re-wrote it then narrated it, how are we suppose to GUESS what the intentions are. Or even for that matter that there were even ANY intentions at all?

    Before you can accurately dictate What the intentions are, or if there were any, you need to first identify the source. We can do the very same thing with Fairy Tails. Just pretend there is a guestion of who thr real author was and go for it.

    This is a rather complicated question. Almost all scholars agree that we don't know the sources or the narrator(s) of Genesis, but most scholars agree that Genesis was compiled by king Solomon's priestly scribes. Their intentions were to favor the worship of Jehovah in a period of political and religious unrest in Israel. Whe know this through many historical sources.

    This is why I use the term "narrator", they had a clear purpose when they compiled Genesis. We may not know the name of the narrator(s), nor the sources, but we can picture his (their) intentions to some extent.

    Tech corner:

    For some reason unknown to me, special characters like these have been removed from my article: , : Please apologize!

    And I don't know why my post showed up twice.

  • plmkrzy
    plmkrzy

    Isnt this merely a human feature?

    Actually no. It isnt.

    But anyway my point about your point would be, what is the point in attempting to literalize passages in a book that wasnt even written at the stories present time? As though there are deep dark hidden passages between the passages to uncover?

    Sometimes IMHO, we try to see way more then what is actually there and only end up getting lost in a pointless venture. You know the saying cant see the forest for the trees?

    Hoping this doesn't leave the screen if in a box?

  • plmkrzy
    plmkrzy

    Atreyu

    well putting it in a box didn't work

    So maybe this one is dusted? Oh well.

    Thanks for the kind response regardless of my sarcassim

    Your a good sport

  • Atreyu
    Atreyu

    plm: I tend to agree to your points.

    But let med state my point:

    The story about the serpent in Eden can be interpreted in many ways. JW tend to interpret it in the classical Christian way, with their own twist. They read something into the story that isn't there - and take their own addition as an established fact. But - their is no mentioniong of some being behind the serpent, controlling it, some kind of a "puppeteer". There's not even a hint. Of course, we are allowed to interpret some additional meaning into the story, but we can not regard our own thughts about it as an established fact.

    It seems more likely to me that the story about the serpent have similarities to ancient Egyptian religion; they didn't believe that the gods posessed animals, but that some god were immanent present in certain animals. (That the animal really was the god. Killing the animal would mean killing the god.) In our Judeo-Christian tradition we rather think of spirits as transcendent beings, that the spirit is not bound by, say, an animal that it posesses.

    In this view, the serpent can be regarded as an instrument for some spiritual being behind it. But in the Egyptian view, the serpent would be regarded as a divine creature in itself, a being which contained both animal features and the features of a god. And, killing that animal would mean killing the god.

    Many commentators have applied similar interpretations to the story about the serpent in Eden. In this way, there is no problem in a cautious and speaking snake that seduces a woman. The serpent was a god itself, a god that opposed Jehovah. If this was the common interpretation among the ancient Hebrews, it's easy to see how the later Jews and Christians interpreted Satan into the story.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit