Adam & Eve

[PsychoSarah]

The narrative supports my view, and, the devil hasn't been cast into 'hell' just yet.

Demonstrate it, don't just claim it.

 

[civilwarbuff]

All of that is in just 1 book of the New Testament. Find a quote from the Old Testament that says the serpent is satan or the devil. Good luck finding one.

One quote is enough simply because it is true. Unless you think the Bible lies?

 

[PsychoSarah]

One quote is enough simply because it is true. Unless you think the Bible lies?

-_- lie implies the intent to deceive, and I would never claim to know the exact intentions of the authors. Obviously, as an atheist that has read it, I don't view the text to represent reality. Nice attempt to frame that question to make me look like a jerk, though, but you need to make it more subtle.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Demonstrate it, don't just claim it.

If you want to come here and discuss scripture you really should read it first.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If you want to come here and discuss scripture you really should read it first.

I have. I have been a seeker of faith for nearly 8 years. Reading scripture is part of the reason why my atheism has persisted. Don't assume I haven't read it just because I came to conclusions that you disagree with. To be fair, it has been quite some time since I have read it in whole, but I am not some ignorant person making claims on the content of a story I have never read.

 

[civilwarbuff]

-_- lie implies the intent to deceive, and I would never claim to know the exact intentions of the authors. Obviously, as an atheist that has read it, I don't view the text to represent reality. Nice attempt to frame that question to make me look like a jerk, though, but you need to make it more subtle.

If I wanted to be subtle, I would be subtle. Frequently the upfront and direct method works best.....

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Demonstrate it, don't just claim it.

Sure. Here's the root word for serpent;

05172 // vxn // nachash // naw-khash' //

a primitive root; TWOT - 1348; v

AV - enchantment 4, divine 2, enchanter 1, indeed 1, certainly 1,
learn by experience 1, diligently observe 1; 11

1) to practice divination, divine, observe signs, learn by experience,
diligently observe, practice fortunetelling, take as an omen
1a) (Piel)
1a1) to practice divination
1a2) to observe the signs or omens

If you called someone a "snake in the grass", a familiar phrase, you would be literally calling him or her a snake, but the meaning would clearly not be a literal snake, a lying, cheating, scumbag.

Revelation 20 reveals when Satan will be placed in hell (a place of restraint) at the end of the human age and beginning of the millennial rule of Christ.
Revelation 20King James Version (KJV)

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Sure. Here's the root word for serpent;

05172 // vxn // nachash // naw-khash' //

a primitive root; TWOT - 1348; v

AV - enchantment 4, divine 2, enchanter 1, indeed 1, certainly 1,
learn by experience 1, diligently observe 1; 11

1) to practice divination, divine, observe signs, learn by experience,
diligently observe, practice fortunetelling, take as an omen
1a) (Piel)
1a1) to practice divination
1a2) to observe the signs or omens

If you called someone a "snake in the grass", a familiar phrase, you would be literally calling him or her a snake, but the meaning would clearly not be a literal snake, a lying, cheating, scumbag.

-_- sure, enchanter. now show me how the word "satan" or "devil" means any of that

 

[OldWiseGuy]

-_- sure, enchanter. now show me how the word "satan" or "devil" means any of that

I don't think I can.

Reread my post. I've added to it.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Just looked at Strong and Thayer (short version)
From Genesis 3:1
H5175
Original: נחשׁ
Transliteration: nâchâsh
Phonetic: naw-khawsh'
BDB Definition:
serpent, snake
serpent
image (of serpent)
fleeing serpent (mythological)
Origin: from H5172
TWOT entry: 1347a
Part(s) of speech: Noun Masculine
Strong's Definition: From H5172; a snake (from its hiss): - serpent.

From Rev 20:2
G3789
Original: ὄφις
Transliteration: ophis
Phonetic: of'-is
Thayer Definition:
snake, serpent
with the ancients, the serpent was an emblem of cunning and wisdom. The serpent who deceived Eve was regarded by the Jews as the devil.
Origin: probably from G3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision)
TDNT entry: 14:26,7
Part(s) of speech: Noun Masculine
Strong's Definition: Probably from G3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision); a snake, figuratively (as a type of sly cunning) an artful malicious person, especially Satan: - serpent.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I don't think I can.

Reread my post. I've added to it.

Yes, and it is still all in Revelation. You haven't even presented any biblical passages that suggest that the serpent in the Garden of Eden could be the devil outside of just that 1 NT text; not in the OT or the NT. Also, calling the devil "that old serpent" does not mean that the text is saying that the devil and the serpent in the garden of Eden are the same being, because snakes are often associated in imagery of slyness and deception. That is, it might not be literally calling the devil an actual serpent, but rather applying the personality traits associated with the imagery of serpents to the devil. And you still have yet to reconcile the punishment of the serpent in Eden with that of the devil.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes, and it is still all in Revelation. You haven't even presented any biblical passages that suggest that the serpent in the Garden of Eden could be the devil outside of just that 1 NT text; not in the OT or the NT. Also, calling the devil "that old serpent" does not mean that the text is saying that the devil and the serpent in the garden of Eden are the same being, because snakes are often associated in imagery of slyness and deception. That is, it might not be literally calling the devil an actual serpent, but rather applying the personality traits associated with the imagery of serpents to the devil. And you still have yet to reconcile the punishment of the serpent in Eden with that of the devil.

Change "that old serpent" to "that serpent of old" and it fits pretty well with the serpent in the garden. And yes it may well have been a metaphor for a sly, cunning being. Causing that being to 'go on (it's) belly' is another way of 'casting (it) down' to the earth. It's poetry.

That "Satan", the "Devil", and that "Old Serpent" are one-in-the-same was part of the revelation of Christ. It ties up those loose ends.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Change "that old serpent" to "that serpent of old" and it fits pretty well with the serpent in the garden. And yes it may well have been a metaphor for a sly, cunning being. Causing that being to 'go on (it's) belly' is another way of 'casting (it) down' to the earth. It's poetry.

That "Satan", the "Devil", and that "Old Serpent" are one-in-the-same was part of the revelation of Christ. It ties up those loose ends.

Well duh, if I change the wording to fit a certain portrayal, I can make the bible say whatever I want. No, you don't just get to rearrange the words to change the meaning, you have to work with what is actually there.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Well duh, if I change the wording to fit a certain portrayal, I can make the bible say whatever I want. No, you don't just get to rearrange the words to change the meaning, you have to work with what is actually there.

The bible has been 'interpreted' by translation by the various scholars over the years. There is plenty of room within word definitions for making small changes that clarify some of the narratives. My favorite is where Eve "gave" Adam the fruit and he ate of it. The word "gave" should have been translated "nagged" (of course the translator would find himself sleeping on the couch if he did).

 

[civilwarbuff]

See post #50

 

[joshua 1 9]

All of that is in just 1 book of the New Testament. Find a quote from the Old Testament that says the serpent is satan or the devil. Good luck finding one.

Remember the adage that guides interpretation: "the New Testament is in the Old concealed, the Old is in the New revealed.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Remember the adage that guides interpretation: "the New Testament is in the Old concealed, the Old is in the New revealed.

I do not care about some adage that is independent of what the text actually says. If the bible doesn't give that advice consistently within its pages, I don't view it as relevant.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The bible has been 'interpreted' by translation by the various scholars over the years. There is plenty of room within word definitions for making small changes that clarify some of the narratives. My favorite is where Eve "gave" Adam the fruit and he ate of it. The word "gave" should have been translated "nagged" (of course the translator would find himself sleeping on the couch if he did).

Seeing as the bible has no issue with putting various women in negative lights, I highly doubt that translation error was intentional. Also, you didn't change the words to equivalent words of negligible change in meaning; you changed the order of them to give a different meaning. Also, the different meaning you gave it isn't even conclusive in what you think the bible portrays. That is, even if the bible was written the way that you rearranged it, it would still be invalid to assume that the serpent in the garden of Eden was the devil.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I do not care about some adage that is independent of what the text actually says. If the bible doesn't give that advice consistently within its pages, I don't view it as relevant.

I am just trying to help you to understand the Bible.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Seeing as the bible has no issue with putting various women in negative lights, I highly doubt that translation error was intentional. Also, you didn't change the words to equivalent words of negligible change in meaning; you changed the order of them to give a different meaning. Also, the different meaning you gave it isn't even conclusive in what you think the bible portrays. That is, even if the bible was written the way that you rearranged it, it would still be invalid to assume that the serpent in the garden of Eden was the devil.

But if the Serpent is old isn't he also the Serpent of old? The way old is used in this regard I'm sure this being antedates the garden incident. As a spirit being the Serpent wouldn't get 'old' in the human sense of 'aging', therefore it would more properly be read that Serpent of old. This would support my supposition.