You can just see Eve's eyes brighten from the sugar rush as she realized the Serpent was right after all: she didn't die. So the woman brought home a sample and convinced her husband to try it too.
†. Gen 3:6e . . She also gave some to her husband, and he ate.
Did she first deftly dice the fruit and camouflage it in a tasty parfait so her husband wouldn't know what he was eating? No. Adam knew exactly what he was doing. He went into it with both eyes wide open.
†. 1Tim 2:14a . . And Adam was not the one deceived;
It's well known among sales managers that consumers are more likely to buy from a friend or a relative, especially from a spouse, than from a stranger. No doubt Eve ate some of the fruit right then and there in front of her husband to demonstrate that it was tasty, nourishing, and perfectly safe— as anyone could plainly see.
†. Gen 3:7a . .Then the eyes of both of them were opened
The woman ate the fruit first; but her eyes weren't opened until sometime later after her husband ate his own share. (Thus was spawned the saying: It takes two to tango.)
Although Eve was tricked, she wasn't innocent; she was just as guilty as her husband. The Bible doesn't accept ignorance as an excuse.
†. 1Tim 2:14b . . the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression.
You have to wonder why the husband went along with his wife and did something he knew full well to be breaking God's commandment and putting himself at risk of death.
Genesis doesn't reveal why Adam chose to eat the fruit. I suppose he had his reasons, but apparently God didn't think they were sufficient to mitigate the man's error. But when your wife is sitting right beside you happily munching away on something that you were led to believe was deadly poisonous, and she's still healthy, lucid, and exhibiting no ill side effects; how are you supposed to react to that? I think Adam was cautious at first, and kept a wary eye on Eve for some time waiting to see if she would get sick; and when she didn't, he surely had to wonder if maybe God was wrong. (The Serpent was pretty smart. It somehow knew that Eve was immune to the fruit by herself, and that nothing would happen to either of them until Adam ate his share.)
C.L.I.F.F. /
Last edited by Webers_Home; 21st August 2009 at 10:28 AM.
. †. Gen 3:7b . . and they perceived that they were naked;
The word for perceived is from yada` (yaw-dah') which means: to know or ascertain by seeing. The corresponding word in the New Testament is ginosko (ghin-oce'-ko).
Those two words imply much more than the kind of knowledge you get from a book or a lecture— which are merely informational kinds of knowledge. Perceptual knowledge is an intuitive kind of knowledge; things that you can sense without being told about them or having them explained to you.
There is more to the statement "they perceived that they were naked" than meets the eye. For them to realize they were naked without ever even once being instructed about nudity, can only mean one thing: they became self conscious for the very first time. Websters' defines self conscious as: uncomfortably aware of one's self as the object of the observation of others.
†. Gen 3:7c . . and they sewed together fig leaves and made themselves loincloths.
I seriously doubt they had a needle and thread. The word for sew is taphar (taw-far') which just simply means to fabricate clothing. If taphar were used to strictly mean needle and thread; then it would appear that Job stitched fabric directly to his own skin (Job 16:15).
Why didn't they cover their whole bodies? Whey just their pelvic regions? Obviously, Adam and his wife were experiencing a guilt complex about their own sexuality; where before, they didn't feel naughty about their sexuality at all.
We might call the inclination to wear clothing a mark of true civilization; but that inclination is actually the result of early man's sin and rebellion against God. I'm not suggesting people go back to nudity; only pointing out why civilized people regard public nudity as indecent exposure practiced by perverts.
Some say there were no agents in the fruit to cause the changes in human nature that occurred in the Adams. But I'm not so sure. It's well known what happens to kids when they move into adolescence. Hormonal chemicals kick in, and their childish innocence vanishes; right out the window. They lose interest in kid's toys and begin to take an interest in things more appropriate for their age; including a very noticeable interest in themselves, and in the opposite sex; and most especially in what others think about them. The sweet little kids that so tugged at our heart strings disappear forever as they rapidly morph into totally different (and sometimes very unpleasant) people.
Those adolescent changes aren't miraculous changes— they're totally natural, hormonally induced, organic changes. So if kids today undergo a natural kind of change because of the chemicals generated by the glands in their own bodies, then there is good reason to believe that fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil actually did contain something to cause Adam and his wife to morph and develop a guilt complex.
At any rate, the pending dialogue, between God and Man in the next few verses, implies that God himself did nothing at all to make those two people change. On the page of Scripture, their new personalities are directly related to the fruit and to nothing else. So instead of tweaking our imaginations to construct a spiritual explanation, I think it would be better to stick with the biological one and let it go at that.
The fruit not only messed up their personalities, but it also messed up their DNA in such a way that now everybody who descends from the Adams, at some point in their life, exhibits a guilt complex over sex and the human body. Since sexual self consciousness is universal, it demonstrates that everybody shares the consequence of that one sin. And since everybody shares the consequence, it's logical everybody must also share in the act— and no amount of baptism nor religious rites and rituals have been proven effective to remove either the consequence or the complicity.
. †. Gen 3:8a . .They heard the sound of Yhvh God moving about in the garden at the breezy time of day;
Targum authors saw that a little differently. They interpreted that verse to mean: And they heard the voice of the word of the Lord God. (Targum Jonathan)
In their estimation, it was not Yhvh God himself in person moving about in the garden— it was His word, which, according to ancient Jewish thought, can appear as a visible being; and is The True God's way of interacting with Man without actually being here Himself on the earth in person.
What time of day is the breezy time? Well, around 6:00 pm yesterday here in the Portland Oregon area there was a pleasant breeze moving through my neighborhood. Whether or not that was the time of day when the Word of Yhvh God strolled through the garden is impossible to know for certain.
The garden existed in a pre-Flood era; prior to Man's obtaining food by the sweat of his brow. Whether the Eden breeze was for cooling purposes is impossible to know; but I would guess it was for moving the mists around to irrigate the vegetation, and may have been a routine event in the garden's daily schedule; which the Adams appropriated for a sort of pre-British tea time.
The sound they heard must have been a very distinctive one. Maybe the Word of Yhvh God was whistling a pleasant melody or maybe even some familiar bird calls as he strolled through the garden enjoying its beauty. After all, it was His garden; since it was God who created the earth— Adam didn't own it outright. Man's status is actually that of a share-cropper.
†. John 1:1-3 . . In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
I think the Word of Yhvh God conducted school for the Adams every day at just about this time; so His arrival was likely routine and expected. It was an opportunity for the Adams to share their experiences and ask questions about things in nature that they didn't fully understand. And maybe they even talked about life on other planets, and how to make hot cocoa and pop corn.
Can you imagine the incredible advantage of being in a classroom with the Word of Yhvh God? He's the undisputed expert on everything. You would never need a second opinion, nor go away wondering if your speaker really knew what He was talking about.
†. John 1:4 . . In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
†. John 1:9 . .There was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
I used to wonder how the light of God could possibly enlighten every man when not every man is instructed in the Bible; but I was coming at this from the wrong angle.
Webster's defines existentialism as: a chiefly 20th century philosophical movement embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad
I seriously doubt that the animal kingdom loses any sleep pondering the concepts of right and wrong and the possibility of a hereafter. But existentialism, in one form or another, is a commonality among human beings regardless of race or gender. When the animal kingdom looks at the world of nature around itself, all it sees is habitat. But Man doesn't just roam the earth like a two-footed beast; no, Man ponders the earth; not as habitat, but as a wonder— as an object of study —and it's origin baffles him.
Without even being aware of it, the light of God is at work in every man's mind, and it doesn't matter whether the individual man is a Neanderthal, a modern sophisticate, or a seminary graduate: all men are eventually driven by that Light to ponder the purpose of their existence; whereas the animal kingdom merely survives without giving the slightest thought to its purpose. Without the light of God at work in men's minds, their consciousness would be little more elevated than that of human wildlife.
†. Ecc 3:18 . . Then I realized that God allows people to continue in their sinful ways so He can prove them. That way, they can see for themselves that they are no better than beasts.
C.L.I.F.F. /
Last edited by Webers_Home; 23rd August 2009 at 08:32 AM.
. †. Gen 3:8b . . and the man and his wife hid from Yhvh God among the trees of the garden.
Well, that's understandable. They usually met with God in the buff but now, the Adams were no longer comfortable with frontal nudity and the Word of the Lord God would surely notice their unease.
You know; what they did was so human. When people call on the phone, or come to the door, it isn't unusual for their friends to pretend they're not home so they don't have to talk to them. And even out shopping or somewhere in public, people are prone to look down, or the other way and pretend they don't see their friends. It's odd to think humans started that behavior pattern so far back in the history of Man.
†. Gen 3:9a . .Yhvh God called out to the man
The word for man in that verse is from 'adam (aw-dawm') which just means a human being; as a specie. That word can apply to either a man or a woman; but in this case it was the male.
Why did God call out to the male first? Well, it would appear that the husband is supposed to be God's first point of contact in the family and there exists an intrinsic condition of headship in marriage. In the grand family of Man, the male was created first; and he therefore inherited some responsibilities that go along with primogeniture— like for instance: he's the default priest in the home; and also the adult held most accountable for the family unit's welfare.
†. 1Cor 11:3-9 . . Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head— it is just as though her head were shaved.
. . If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
†. 1Tim 3:1-5 . . Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?)
Adam didn't do so good as the spiritual leader in his own home; and their son Abel will become the very first recorded holy man in the Bible (Luke 11:50-51).
†. Gen 3:9b . . and said to him: Where are you?
Isn't God supposed to be omniscient? Then why ask where the man was? Although God is on a much higher intellectual plain than Man, He doesn't seem to mind condescending to Man's level. That is very helpful because how would you know how to act around God unless He was willing to accommodate the inherent limitations of the 3 pound lump of flabby organic tissue in your head sufficing for Man's mortal little mind. But the thing to notice in this episode, is that God took the initiative and sought Man, not the other way around.
†. Rom 3:10-12 . . As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.
†. Gen 3:10 . . He replied: I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.
This is the very first time on record that a human being was afraid of anything, much less the presence of God. Man's fear of the Bible's God is directly related to a guilty conscience.
But exactly of what was Adam afraid? Because he disobeyed and ate the fruit? No, oddly enough, he wasn't. Adam simply didn't want God to see him in the nude. His newly awakened conscious felt that nudity was not only inappropriate; but also punishable even though God has never even one time, in the entire Bible, banned nudity.
Two possible "references" to a ban on nudity are Ex 20:26 and Ex 28:42. However, the restrictions in those passages pertain specifically to Levitical priests, and only during the performance of their duties; not to rank and file pew warmers. I have yet to either find, or be shown, a single passage in either the Old Testament or the New that specifically forbids nudity per se. The human conscience only thinks it's forbidden because of its intrinsic guilt complex over sex and the human body; which is a direct result of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Events preceding Jesus' return are going to terrify a good many of the world's wicked people in the future.
†. Rev 6:12-17 . . I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as late figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.
. .Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. They called to the mountains and the rocks, saying: Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?
Man has a natural fear of the Bible's God because he instinctively feels that his behavior deserves retribution. The Adams had been very close friends with the Word of the Lord God up to this point; yet practically overnight they began avoiding personal contact with their maker.
. †. Gen 3:11 . .Then He asked: Who told you that you were naked? Did you eat of the tree from which I had forbidden you to eat?
The first part of that question could be paraphrased as: Who said anything about nudity?
Are the creatures in the animal world naked? No, they aren't. They're dressed exactly as God created them. And in the beginning; Man was dressed exactly as God created him too. So when Man was created; he wasn't naked even though from our point of view he was. So then, nudity is natural and wearing clothing is unnatural. But if the Adams were nude, they why were they not nude? Because there is no such a thing as nudity in nature. Clothing is an artificial skin; it's not a natural skin. If God intended Man to wear artificial skin, he would have made clothing for him right at the gun.
You see, "nudity" is a man-made point of view. That point of view didn't come from God. No; the Adams coined it for themselves to describe their natural condition. Therefore, nudity isn't intrinsically sinful. What's intrinsically sinful is the felt shame of nudity (c.f. Rev 3:18, Rev 16:15). In conclusion: a mind that perceives nudity as naughty, is a fallen mind because that kind of a mind is the direct result of the Adams eating the forbidden fruit.
So why didn't Adam just meet God in the buff that day and try to act as if nothing was amiss? Because he just couldn't do it. The Adams now felt naughty in the buff and they didn't want God to think they were exposing themselves like a couple of sick perverts.
Like a kid playing with his dad's gun while he's at work and puts a bullet through the bedroom wall; they had done something taboo and there was just no way to cover it up. But instead of coming clean about it, they're going to make excuses.
†. Gen 3:12 . .The man said: The woman You put at my side— she gave me of the tree, and I ate.
It appears that Adam didn't want to go down alone on this. And why specify Eve as the woman "You" put at my side? Did Adam actually insinuate that God set him up to take a fall? Like: "This wouldn't have happened if you hadn't imposed that female upon me. Did I ask for a wife? NO! And what kind of person is this woman you gave me anyway? She has managed to ruin my life in very short order. Is this your idea of the perfect companion?"
Instead of gratitude to God for His goodness and generosity in providing him a much needed companion, Adam actually blamed God's blessing for his troubles! Boy does that ever sound familiar. Every day, all the time, people blame God for the bad luck in their lives instead of putting the blame right squarely where it really belongs— upon themselves, and upon the foibles of the human race.
Adam is already beginning to manifest a very common aspect of human nature of which all of us are so familiar— blaming others for the way we act.
I once worked in a boatyard with a very hot tempered man. Previous to his employment with us, we had another with just about the same temperament who quit right before the second one signed on. Some time later, the new guy got irate about something or other and said; "Now I know why that other guy was difficult. You made him that way." (chuckle) Wasn't that a perfectly natural Adamic reaction?
†. Prv 17:3 . .The refining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold: but Yhvh trieth the hearts.
It's easy to be sweet, kind, agreeable, and courteous during a fair wind and a fast passage; but not so easy when something brings on a storm of adversity. That's when the dross in your personality will come to the surface. You have a choice: Do I skim off the dross so that I become a better person, or do I leave the dross and blame the adversity for "making" me that way?
I often hear it said about someone that they "bring out the worst in people". Well, what's that worst doing inside people in the first place? No matter how much a furnace attempts to refine pure silver and/or pure gold, it will fail because there are no impurities in pure metals. So then, if it's possible to bring out the worst in people, it's only because they are unrefined to begin with.
. †. Gen 3:13 . . And Yhvh God said to the woman: What is this you have done! The woman replied: The serpent duped me, and I ate.
That's true, but not the whole truth. She left out her personal motivations.
Actually, God didn't ask the woman to answer for eating the fruit. No, He asked her to explain why she gave the fruit to her husband. Where's the answer to that? It's not there because she doesn't want to talk about it. I think Eve was very chagrined about the whole thing. The poor kid fell for the Serpent's scam; hook, line, and sinker. She must have felt like a total fool.
But suppose Eve had failed to persuade her husband to eat a share of the fruit. What then? You know, it's really hard to tell. The male and the female together are considered to be Man (Gen 5:2). If neither developed a guilt complex about sex and the human body until after the male ate his share, then maybe neither would have undergone Death until after both ate some. The Bible does, after all, lay the blame for Man's debilitation upon the male's shoulders rather than the female's (Rom 5:12-21).
There is more to Death than meets the eye. It's not stated in Genesis precisely what that might be. But it's certain that the fruit contained something in it that was fatal not so much to Man's body, but to Man's inner self, his psyche. Man's body dies only because he no longer has access to the tree of life to keep himself alive. But the tree of good and bad changed human nature in a very marked way; and Man became a sinful being.
God told Adam he would die the very day he ate the fruit (Gen 2:16-17). However, death, as we normally understand it, didn't occur for Adam until hundreds of years later (Gen 5:5). So there is another kind of Death in Man that isn't so obvious nor is it easily understood. Immediate symptoms of Adam's inner demise were: 1) he became a sensual being with a guilt complex about sex and the human body, 2) he developed a humanistic sense of right and wrong, 3) he became uneasy in his creator's presence, and 4) he started blaming others for his own faults.
Jesus testified that a time for resurrection is not only coming later on, but that a time for it is right now too.
†. John 5:25 . . I tell you the truth, a time is coming, and has now come, when the Dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.
So it is possible for people to be dead in two different aspects— physical and mental: body and soul. If that's true, then Jesus' testimony didn't refer only to the corpses in graves, but also to people walking around among us who haven't passed on yet. Yes; they are dead even while they live.
When people hear the Gospel and trust it's message, at that very moment, by a miracle of God, they move from Death to Life.
†. John 5:24 . . I assure you, those who heed my message, and trust the God who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from Death into Life.
That passage from Death to Life is an invisible resurrection that precedes the future resurrection of the body.
†. John 3:6-8 . . Flesh gives birth to flesh, but The Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying: You must be born again. The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of The Spirit.
In his letter to the believers at Ephesus, Paul reminded them of their past; and the condition they were in before accepting the Gospel. They were dead.
†. Eph 2:1-3 . . As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.
Paul included himself as one of the dead— an object of wrath —by using the words "All of us." So then, human nature itself is in a condition of Death; and has been ever since the forbidden fruit incident.
C.L.I.F.F. /
Last edited by Webers_Home; 26th August 2009 at 11:37 AM.
. †. Gen 3:14a . .Then Yhvh God said to the serpent,
The Bible doesn't specifically report that all three perpetrators appeared before God together; but they very well may have because as soon as God finishes interrogating the humans, He will pass sentence upon all three without a pause. According to a Targum, ancient Jews believed that's exactly how it went down.
T~ And the Lord God brought the three unto judgment; and He said to the serpent, etc etc etc. (Targum Jonathan)
A marked departure in procedure is very evident here. God demanded the man and the woman explain themselves; but didn't interrogate the Serpent at all. On the page of scripture, the Serpent's trial stage was bypassed and proceedings went straight to the sentencing stage. It's almost as if the Serpent had already discussed with God how it planned to turn the humans against Him; like when it later moved against Job.
†. Job 1:6-12 . . One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them. Yhvh said to Satan: Where have you come from? Satan answered the Lord: From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it. Then Yhvh said to Satan: Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.
. . Does Job fear God for nothing? Satan replied. Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face. Yhvh said to Satan: Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger. Then Satan went out from the presence of the Lord.
A similar dialogue took place later in Job 2:1-6 when Satan was given liberty to ruin Job's health.
Whey ever would a righteous, loving God give a powerful dark being that kind of permission and stand by and do nothing while it caused the murder and kidnapping of Job's servants and the theft of his livestock? How could God permit it to kill Job's children by a tornado which was subsequently blamed as an act of God; and then later to ruin Job's health?
Why did God stand by and do nothing while the Serpent beguiled Eve? Could it be possible the Serpent had prior approval to do it? That's disturbing, isn't it? To think that in the unseen spirit world, Man is a mere pawn between God and His ancient opponent; the Serpent. At any moment, any one of us could be handed over to the dark world's whims just like Eve was and just like Job was: to have our lives, our families, our health; and our fortunes and our futures ruined in no time at all. When those times come— and there is no guarantee they won't —it's not a time to cave in to pressure and forsake God. It's a time to follow Job's example and cling to God with an even more tenacious trust than ever.
†. Job 1:20-22 . . At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship and said: Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked I will depart. Yhvh gave and Yhvh has taken away; may the name of Yhvh be praised. In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
†. Job 2:9-10 . . His wife said to him: Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die! He replied: You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble? In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.
†. Hab 3:17-18 . .Though the fig tree does not bud and there are no grapes on the vines, though the olive crop fails and the fields produce no food, though there are no sheep in the pen and no cattle in the stalls, yet I will rejoice in Yhvh, I will be joyful in God my rescuer.
†. Rom 8:35-39 . .Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written: "For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered." No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
It might seem curious that God allowed the Serpent to tempt the first couple, and drag them and their posterity down to a ruin that God surely foreknew in advance would happen. But it was right; and it couldn't be helped because Man is made in God's image. God has the volition to choose between good and evil and therefore Man has to be free to exercise those options too. People can't always assume God will be there to shield them from temptation. As creatures made in God's image; we have got to take some responsibility for ourselves, and stand up against temptation.
†. 1Cor 10:12-13 . .Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall. No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it.
†. 1Pet 1:5-7 . .Who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith— of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire— may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed.
†. Jas 1:2-4 . . Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.
†. Jas 1:12-15 . . Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him. When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
One thing for sure about the Serpent; it is an utterly condemned individual. Repentance is out of the question and definitely NOT an option. It is only too obvious that the Serpent crossed over a line somewhere in the past and now there is no going back. Man is redeemable. But the Serpent is beyond hope. The scary part is; the Serpent is not only doomed, but busy making every effort to take as many human beings down with it as possible— like a disgruntled postal worker coming in one day and cutting loose on his co-workers with a shotgun.
The Serpent's strategy is actually quite straightforward. If it cannot defeat God (a foregone conclusion), then it will make every effort to at least frustrate His purposes. It is truly a bitter vendetta; and with frail little Man caught right in the middle of it.
. †. Gen 3:14b . . Because you did this, more cursed shall you be than all cattle and all the wild beasts:
Why measure the Serpent's curse as "more than" the cattle and the beasts? Does this indicate that the animal world was cursed when Man fell? Yes, apparently it does.
†. Rom 8:19-21 . . For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
The New Testament Greek word for corruption is phthora (fthor-ah'); which means decay, and everything in the cosmos is subject to it; even stalwart fixtures like the Alps: they too are steadily crumbling and dissolving into piles of rubble as decay takes its toll on the mighty solid rocks pushed up to heights like the Eiger (13,025 ft) the Matterhorn (14,692 ft) and Mont Blanc (15,781 ft). Yes, rocks do decay: they all decay; especially iron-bearing rocks. As the iron rusts out, the rocks steadily turn into frangible material and fall apart.
According to a documentary I saw on the History Channel, the Alps in the past were once quite a bit higher than they are now— in some places miles higher —and it's a geological certainty that it's only a matter of time before the forces of nature reduce the Alps to the elevation of rolling hills like the Appalachians in the southern USA.
The Greek word for futility is mataiotes (mat-ah-yot'-ace) which means: inutility. Webster's defines inutility as: useless, worthless, and good for nothing. Isn't that something? When God finished creating on the sixth day, He evaluated His product and graded it "very good" (Gen 1:31). But no longer. Now, the current cosmos has no permanent value; and is slated to be completely destroyed in order to make way for a totally new one (Isa 34:1-4, Isa 51:6, Isa 65:17, Rev 21:1) where we'll be right back to a Gen 1:1 all over again.
The Hebrew word for curse is from 'arar (aw-rar') which means: to execrate. Webster's defines execrate as: to declare to be evil or detestable; viz: denounce. Synonyms listed for execrate are: hate, abhor, abominate, detest, and loathe. It seems God was expressing His deepest contempt for the Serpent and saying it was lower than an animal for what it did.
The third chapter began with a statement that the Serpent was more cunning than any of the beasts of the field, a creature that began with a level of dignity way over and beyond the land animals; but fell to a position of esteem far below them because of what it did to the Adams family. In other words, the Serpent is now the lowest thing on the face of the earth.
The Serpent was, at one time a very glorious, high ranking, angel; before it went bad.
†. Ezek 28:11-15 . .The word of Yhvh came to me: O mortal, intone a dirge over the king of Tyre and say to him: Thus said Yhvh God: you were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and flawless in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your adornment: carnelian, chrysolite, and amethyst; beryl, lapis lazuli, and jasper; sapphire, turquoise, and emerald; and gold beautifully wrought for you, mined for you, prepared the day you were created. I created you as a cherub with outstretched shielding wings; and you resided on God’s holy mountain; you walked among stones of fire. You were blameless in your ways, from the day you were created until wrongdoing was found in you.
Ezekiel's dirge against Tyre, which continues for five more verses, was doubtless spoken to its human leadership, but the wording is a double entendre and obviously targets an unseen being of whom it is said: "You were in Eden . . I created you as a cherub with outstretched wings."
Cherubs are usually portrayed in religious art as winged children; but it's not likely Ezekiel's cherub was one of those but rather a high ranking order of angel privileged to actually be in the presence of The True God. According to Webster's, the only other type of angel that outranks cherubs are the seraphim.
The ark of Yhvh, once situated in the most holy place of the tabernacle, had golden cherubs whose wings stretched far enough towards each other to touch and make an unbroken protective canopy over the ark's lid. The ark was representative of God's throne, and of the presence of Israel's God; and according to Ex 25:22, that's where He would meet with them.
According to Heb 8:5, the holy items in the tabernacle were representative of actualities in Heaven. So the phrase; "I created you as a cherub with outstretched shielding wings" refers to an angel of very high responsibility and privilege. It was from that honored position that the Serpent fell.
Although the Serpent is now a cursed creature, it would be wrong for Man to ill treat it. The Serpent still ranks higher than humans (who themselves are cursed as well) and deserves all the respect due to a divine being. Jude pointed out that it is not a good thing for human beings to speak evil of any angel; neither the good ones nor the bad ones.
†. Jude 1:4-10 . . For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you . . these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the Devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!" Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals— these are the very things that destroy them.
According to Jude, Christians who abuse and insult the Serpent rank little more than human wildlife. It's true the Serpent certainly deserves shame and contempt; as did President Clinton over his scandal with Monica Lewinski. But Mr.Clinton was still President and has a legitimate right to all the honor and respect the office deserves; whether he himself merits it or not.
. †. Gen 3:14c . . On your belly shall you crawl and dirt shall you eat all the days of your life.
According to ancient Jewish teaching, the Serpent was originally equipped with feet.
T~ upon thy belly thou shalt go, and thy feet shall be cut off, and thy skin thou shalt cast away once in seven years; and the poison of death shall be in thy mouth, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. (Targum Jonathan)
I have never seen, nor yet heard of, a species of snake that eats soil for its food. True, snakes crawl on their bellies; but they probably always did; because that's the way they're designed. Some snakes live in trees and others live in water. Those kinds don't spend a whole lot of time on the ground so not all snakes are alike. I really don't think snakes crawl because they were condemned to crawl. Nor was every species of snake condemned; just the one snake in verse 14.
The expression "crawl and eat dirt" has an application other than the literal. A person who crawls and eats dirt is typically someone held in very low regard— a worm. And "all the days of your life" is saying that God's low opinion of the Serpent will never be upgraded.
Serpents will eat dirt in Messiah's future kingdom; possibly as a perpetual reminder of Man's first great mistake.
†. Isa 65:25 . .The wolf and the lamb shall graze together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and the serpent’s food shall be earth.
Today, snakes don't eat earth, they eat prey. How serpents will survive on dirt is unclear, unless their digestive system will be changed to that of a night crawler. Serpents in scripture are never portrayed as beneficial to Man. They are always of the poisonous variety and a serious threat to Man's health and well being. That will all be different in Messiah's kingdom.
†. Isa 11:8-10 . . A babe shall play over a viper’s hole, and an infant pass his hand over an adder’s den. In all of My sacred mount nothing evil or vile shall be done; for the land shall be filled with devotion to the Lord as water covers the sea. In that day, the stock of Jesse that has remained standing shall become a standard to peoples— nations shall seek his counsel and his abode shall be honored.
†. Gen 3:15a . . I will put enmity between you and the woman,
The word for enmity is from 'eybah (ay-baw') and means: hostility. Webster's defines hostility as animosity, antagonism, antipathy, conflict, and rancor.
You can rest assured Eve never trusted the Serpent again after that day. The enmity was for Eve's own good. If she got all sappy and forgave the Serpent, and kissed and made up, it just might pull another stunt on her; as ruinous as the first. The Serpent was, after all, the father of all con men; and more cunning than any beast of the field. Animals have a way of charming us with their seeming cuteness and innocence.
Eve's friend was a beautiful pixie, an angel: and who is immune to the magic of angels? Angels are so endearing, so disarming, even more so than guinea pigs, ponies, and bunnies, and they have a way with us: in our art, in our poems, and in our greeting cards. You can bet the Serpent would always seek to take full advantage of Eve from that angle.
†. Gen 3:15b . . And between your offspring and her offspring.
Only a fool would ever willingly follow the Serpent now, after seeing what it's capable of. On the whole, the human race doesn't trust the Devil, and would cheerfully crucify the thing if they could get their hands on it. No wonder it never appears in public anymore.
The word for offspring is from zera` (zeh'-rah) and means: seed; figuratively, fruit, plant, sowing-time, and posterity. Zera` is one of those words that can be either singular or plural, depending upon the context. Other words like that are deer, sheep, Man, and head (as in head of livestock). Every kid in a family can be called the parents' zera` whether there's eight kids or a lone child.
†. Gen 3:15c . . He will pound your head, and you will bite his heel.
The word for pound is the very same word for bite. Both are from shuwph (shoof) and means: to gape, i.e. snap at; figuratively, to overwhelm.
Gen 3:15c has a long-range application in Christian theology; ultimately applying to Christ. In the garden, the Serpent won a skirmish and gained the humans' cooperation in its conflict with the Creator. But its victory was only temporary. In the end the woman; via her seed, will destroy the Serpent and its seed. Who are the Serpent's seed? Liars and Murderers; for starters (John 8:44). Additional Serpentary seed are people who exist solely to satisfy their passions and desires (Eph 2:1-3). And people given to rivalry and strife (Jas 3:14-15).
Unfortunately, the Serpent no longer allows itself to be seen in the open like it did that time in the garden with Eve. So it can easily manipulate the minds of its seed covertly, out of sight, and completely undetected. Since people cannot see it, nor hear it, the Serpent's seed are powerless to tell when they're being victimized by one their master's schemes. All the damned are Serpentary seed, and all are under the thumb of its control.
†. Eph 2:1-2 . . And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
†. 2Cor 4:3-4 . . And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
The Serpent managed to incite its seed to execute the woman's seed (Abel and Jesus)— thus injuring his heel. But it was merely an injury, and didn't come anywhere near to finishing her seed off nor in preventing the purposes of God from being accomplished in him. Abel was replaced by Seth, and Christ rose from the dead; he is even now this very moment seated in glory at the right hand of God; destined to eventually take David's throne and rule not only just his native country Israel, but the whole world. The Serpent and its seed are doomed, and will ultimately be totally ruined in Hell.
†. Rev 20:10 . . And the Devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
. The woman is now at the threshold of bringing into the world all of its future populations, who will be destined, by default, to become participants in the Serpent's agenda to dethrone and vanquish God; their maker. She had already demonstrated her power over the male, who had eaten the fruit when she urged him to even knowing it was against his better judgment. The Bible says Adam knew very well what he was doing; unlike the female, who was tricked into it.
With the potentialities of human reproduction now under its control, the Serpent was in a position to build up a very large following— Serpentary offspring, so to speak —children of the Devil: people spawned and cultivated for the specific purpose of forwarding the Serpent's evil agenda. They would of course all be born with the very same inherent human frailties that made it possible to lead the first couple to ruin. Piece of cake. It had been only too easy to pull the first couple's trust away from their maker. Their posterity would be even easier now that all would be born with a mutated nature that is quite naturally inclined towards evil rather than towards good.
The apostle Paul recognized that his own weakness for evil was a natural thing. He committed sins because, inwardly, woven into the very fabric of his soul, he was just simply a sinful being.
†. Rom 7:14-23 . .We know that The Law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that The Law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do— this I keep on doing.
. . Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's Law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members.
Everyone who has ever attempted to live a pious life knows for themselves exactly what Paul was talking about. We have a human nature that's inclined to shun what's right. It is quite naturally inclined to do just the opposite; and although we may control our actions, none us has the power to control either our thoughts, our impulses, or our feelings.
†. Gen 3:16a . . And to the woman He said: I will make most severe your pangs in childbearing;
The word for childbearing is herown (hay-rone'); and/or herayown (hay-raw-yone'); which means conception or pregnancy. For many women, the pregnancy stage of motherhood is often characterized by bloating, illness, nausea, depression, anxiety, insecurity, and irritability. For them, pregnancy is more like a curse than the intended blessing of Gen 1:28.
†. Gen 3:16b . . in pain shall you bear children.
It's difficult to imagine childbirth without pain because that's the way it's always been right from the beginning, even with Eve's very first child. Apparently before Man's fall, having a baby would have been no more painful than a bowel movement— and just as lacking in danger to mom and baby.
†. Gen 3:16c . .Yet your urge shall be for your husband,
What you have there is the earliest of all mandates impacting adultery and promiscuity, and it wasn't given to men; no, it was given to women. Although they suffer in pregnancy and childbirth, women are still capable of enjoying a man's affections.
Eve's feminine mystique can lead to trouble; especially for women who have problems with men. There are women who can't stand men; but they can't stop wanting them either. And that inevitably leads to some serious inner conflicts; and unbearable tensions between the sexes. In spite of their hatred for them, many women find that men still rule their passions. Some hold out for a while, fighting against nature, but it's only a matter of time before most bite the dust and give in just to save their sanity. Women often have to sift through a lot of bums before landing a good one. But with the right guy, family life can be very satisfying; and anyway, it is truly the only sensible arrangement for most of us.
I caught a really cute illustration of Gen 3:16c one morning back in the early 1990's when I was home from work watching Good Morning America with my wife. They often have musical groups performing outside in the street and on that particular day it was Enrique Iglesia.
While Enrique was singing, security hoisted a young girl up on the stage and he began singing his song directly to her. She began choking up and fighting back tears, and then he got down on both knees right in front of her; all the while crooning a very emotional Latin love song and looking right up into her eyes.
And then something happened that was just overwhelming. The girl was wearing a tank top that went down only about mid ways leaving her tummy exposed so you could see her belly button. Enrique gently pressed the palm of his hand on her bare tummy while he was kneeling there singing and looking right up into her eyes. She really lost it then and just about died. Do you think that girl would have hesitated to bear Enrique's children? I tell you she would have gladly endured quints for that man right then and there.
Men have a power over women's passions because God saw to it. But in no way should women ever be humiliated or made to feel ashamed about their feelings for men because if the ladies were unresponsive, then the vast majority of unattached guys in the world would end their days eating dinner out of a can and living a very lonely life; that's for sure.
†. Gen 3:16d . . and he shall rule over you.
Many see subjugation of women in that passage; and that's exactly what it is: but they're only to subordinate themselves to the men in their marriages and their churches; not to every man at large. (1Cor 11:3-10, Eph 5:22, Col 3:18, 1Tim 2:11-15, 1Pet 3:1-6).
C.L.I.F.F. /
Last edited by Webers_Home; 31st August 2009 at 10:11 AM.
Linear Mode
