Genesis Chapter 3 Explained
or
Serpens Decepit Me
May 16, 2014
Apprentice Anon
1
"The Fall" is iconic in Christian art and theology and a proper understanding can only be realized through a step by step approach. Before the expulsion from the garden, the Lord God punished Adam for “hearkening unto the voice of thy wife”; punished the woman for what “thou hast done” and the serpent because “thou hast done this”. Of the three indictments, only the reasoning for Adam’s punishment is explicit, while the serpent and the women’s punishments are based on the vague wording “has done” and “done this”. In the case of Eve, we are unable to determine if she is culpable for acting upon the serpent’s question and rhetoric or because she ate of the tree or because she gave it to Adam. Regarding the serpent, this statement can refer to his tempting Eve or refer to him convincing her to entice Adam to transgress the commandment or could refer to Adam and Eve’s becoming “as one of us”.
Adam places the responsibility of the Fall on Eve. “The woman...gave me of the tree, and I did eat”. Adam’s statement makes certain that the reader knows that the Lord God “gavest her to be with me”. Adam is reasoning cause and the effect and he would not have transgressed without Eve’s efforts (effect) and she was created by the Lord God (cause). Therefore, Adam’s response is that the Lord God is ultimately responsible for the events in the garden.
Eve responds by stating “the serpent beguiled me and I did eat”. We are uncertain how the woman was deceived as the serpent stated that they would not die, their eyes would be opened and they would become like god. This last statement is confirmed later in the text (“Behold the man is become as one of us.”).
The dialog between Eve and the serpent is uneventful, except when Eve states that “we may not eat of it, neither many we touch it.” This is a reversal of the what is expected. We expect for Eve to be told not to touch it and, additionally, not to eat it. Since the commandment was given to Adam alone, from the text we know that Eve has not exactly repeating the commandment. It is possible that either Adam did tell Eve not to touch the tree or she added this statement. Because of the reversal of the expected order of prohibitions, I am inclined to state the Adam did , in fact, tell Eve to not eat it and then added the prohibition regarding touching it. How one is to consume it without touching it is not explained. Eve knows that Adam told her not to eat. She was told that the Lord God said not to eat and they would die if they eat. It seems as if Eve also used reasoning to determine her actions. The aptly named garden of delights has varieties of plants that are good for food. “Why”, she might reason, “is there a deadly fruit here and not placed anywhere in the garden, but in the center of the garden?”.
The serpent, Eve might rationalize, has no apparent reason to lie to me and Adam has no reason to lie to me. However, Eve has not met the Lord God and, yet again, there is no readily available reason why God would lie. The commentary has Eve believe, without any reason, that the fruit was “good for food” and, again without any reason, that it is was “pleasing to the eyes”. The commentary then conforms to the text and states “a tree to be desired to make one wise”, which confirms the serpent’s statement.
It seems as though Eve made her choice solely on more benefits or outcomes. This situation is similar to the book of Revelation. In the Apocalypse, one who obeys God’s commandments to not receive the mark of the Antichrist receives death and these law abiding people are a remnant of humanity. However, the Antichrist gives his followers more options, choices or outcomes than death. The Antichrist’s followers can either take his name, his number or his mark. His followers are not limited the previous three choices, but have the option to place their choice in either their right hand or forehead for a total of six combinations.
Its seems as if Eve risked death for a bite of a fruit when there was presumably a bountiful supply of food in the garden. Although artistic depictions of the Fall place Adam and Eve together, this scenario is not supported by the text. We know the serpent was able to talk to Eve when Adam was not present. From the text we presume Adam was away and “dressing and keeping” the garden, as the Lord God commanded.
Therefore, the Lord God gave Adam two commandments; one positive commandment-to tend the garden-and a negative commandment-not to eat of the tree, whereas Eve as not given any commandment. We presume that Eve did not take it upon herself to assist Adam in tending the garden, so it should come as no surprise that she was the one who ate of the fruit. Adam transgressed the commandment while Eve only transgressed against hearsay or tradition.
Adam transgressed the commandment to not eat of the tree and is punished. Adam’s punishment is that the ground will be cursed and it will be difficult to grow crops (“thorns and thistles”). It is clear that Adam’s punishment is related to his former responsibility in the garden.
Eve’s punishment is that she will experience painful births and Adam will rule over her. Based on this punishment, we presume that they were equals in the garden (“helpmate”), therefore this punishment is appropriate. In the post Fallen world, Adam is now responsible for her actions (“rule over her”), whereas in the garden he was only responsible for his behavior.
Because Eve’s punishment has a distinctly sexual component, we are perplexed why it is included in the Lord God’s punishment. It seems as though the punishment does not fit the crime and, if we do not want to accuse the Lord God of injustice, we must seek another reason for Eve's punishment.
The word “touch” used in the Authorized Bible translation of chapter 3 is translated from the Hebrew word “naga” (Strong's Concordance H5060). “Naga” is translated as
"a primitive root; properly, to touch, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphem., to lie with a woman)"
Because of the context of a fruit, there is no reason to suspect that the word is translated incorrectly. However, because of the reversal of the expected order of prohibitions (do not consume it, do not touch it) and Eve’s painful childbirth, we question whether this is translation is the most appropriate translation.
The sexual euphemism explains how the woman could ingest the tree (H6086. also translated as staff or branch) without touching it. The woman could have had intercourse (eat) without touching the penis (wooden staff or branch). Ezekiel 28: 13 is commonly understood to refer to Satan as the one who “hast been in Eden the garden of God”. In Revelation 12:9, Satan is referenced as “that old serpent”. Therefore, Satan was in the garden and was the old serpent.
We can confidently concluded that Satan seduced Eve (“The serpent beguiled me and I did eat”) and that the Lord God’s punishment was appropriate for the crime.
I look forward to the essay where an aspiring apprentice will write an exegesis on how Eve “gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat”.
Adam places the responsibility of the Fall on Eve. “The woman...gave me of the tree, and I did eat”. Adam’s statement makes certain that the reader knows that the Lord God “gavest her to be with me”. Adam is reasoning cause and the effect and he would not have transgressed without Eve’s efforts (effect) and she was created by the Lord God (cause). Therefore, Adam’s response is that the Lord God is ultimately responsible for the events in the garden.
Eve responds by stating “the serpent beguiled me and I did eat”. We are uncertain how the woman was deceived as the serpent stated that they would not die, their eyes would be opened and they would become like god. This last statement is confirmed later in the text (“Behold the man is become as one of us.”).
The dialog between Eve and the serpent is uneventful, except when Eve states that “we may not eat of it, neither many we touch it.” This is a reversal of the what is expected. We expect for Eve to be told not to touch it and, additionally, not to eat it. Since the commandment was given to Adam alone, from the text we know that Eve has not exactly repeating the commandment. It is possible that either Adam did tell Eve not to touch the tree or she added this statement. Because of the reversal of the expected order of prohibitions, I am inclined to state the Adam did , in fact, tell Eve to not eat it and then added the prohibition regarding touching it. How one is to consume it without touching it is not explained. Eve knows that Adam told her not to eat. She was told that the Lord God said not to eat and they would die if they eat. It seems as if Eve also used reasoning to determine her actions. The aptly named garden of delights has varieties of plants that are good for food. “Why”, she might reason, “is there a deadly fruit here and not placed anywhere in the garden, but in the center of the garden?”.
The serpent, Eve might rationalize, has no apparent reason to lie to me and Adam has no reason to lie to me. However, Eve has not met the Lord God and, yet again, there is no readily available reason why God would lie. The commentary has Eve believe, without any reason, that the fruit was “good for food” and, again without any reason, that it is was “pleasing to the eyes”. The commentary then conforms to the text and states “a tree to be desired to make one wise”, which confirms the serpent’s statement.
It seems as though Eve made her choice solely on more benefits or outcomes. This situation is similar to the book of Revelation. In the Apocalypse, one who obeys God’s commandments to not receive the mark of the Antichrist receives death and these law abiding people are a remnant of humanity. However, the Antichrist gives his followers more options, choices or outcomes than death. The Antichrist’s followers can either take his name, his number or his mark. His followers are not limited the previous three choices, but have the option to place their choice in either their right hand or forehead for a total of six combinations.
Its seems as if Eve risked death for a bite of a fruit when there was presumably a bountiful supply of food in the garden. Although artistic depictions of the Fall place Adam and Eve together, this scenario is not supported by the text. We know the serpent was able to talk to Eve when Adam was not present. From the text we presume Adam was away and “dressing and keeping” the garden, as the Lord God commanded.
Therefore, the Lord God gave Adam two commandments; one positive commandment-to tend the garden-and a negative commandment-not to eat of the tree, whereas Eve as not given any commandment. We presume that Eve did not take it upon herself to assist Adam in tending the garden, so it should come as no surprise that she was the one who ate of the fruit. Adam transgressed the commandment while Eve only transgressed against hearsay or tradition.
Adam transgressed the commandment to not eat of the tree and is punished. Adam’s punishment is that the ground will be cursed and it will be difficult to grow crops (“thorns and thistles”). It is clear that Adam’s punishment is related to his former responsibility in the garden.
Eve’s punishment is that she will experience painful births and Adam will rule over her. Based on this punishment, we presume that they were equals in the garden (“helpmate”), therefore this punishment is appropriate. In the post Fallen world, Adam is now responsible for her actions (“rule over her”), whereas in the garden he was only responsible for his behavior.
Because Eve’s punishment has a distinctly sexual component, we are perplexed why it is included in the Lord God’s punishment. It seems as though the punishment does not fit the crime and, if we do not want to accuse the Lord God of injustice, we must seek another reason for Eve's punishment.
The word “touch” used in the Authorized Bible translation of chapter 3 is translated from the Hebrew word “naga” (Strong's Concordance H5060). “Naga” is translated as
"a primitive root; properly, to touch, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphem., to lie with a woman)"
Because of the context of a fruit, there is no reason to suspect that the word is translated incorrectly. However, because of the reversal of the expected order of prohibitions (do not consume it, do not touch it) and Eve’s painful childbirth, we question whether this is translation is the most appropriate translation.
The sexual euphemism explains how the woman could ingest the tree (H6086. also translated as staff or branch) without touching it. The woman could have had intercourse (eat) without touching the penis (wooden staff or branch). Ezekiel 28: 13 is commonly understood to refer to Satan as the one who “hast been in Eden the garden of God”. In Revelation 12:9, Satan is referenced as “that old serpent”. Therefore, Satan was in the garden and was the old serpent.
We can confidently concluded that Satan seduced Eve (“The serpent beguiled me and I did eat”) and that the Lord God’s punishment was appropriate for the crime.
I look forward to the essay where an aspiring apprentice will write an exegesis on how Eve “gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat”.
van der Goes, 1479, The Fall.
The serpent is correctly depicted with legs. We presume that any depictions of the serpent without legs were created before the introduction of the story of the Fall.
The serpent is correctly depicted with legs. We presume that any depictions of the serpent without legs were created before the introduction of the story of the Fall.
addendum
The occult maxim "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Apprentice Anon makes extraordinary claims with little evidence. Although I cautioned Apprentice Anon from publishing this work, I will do what I can to assist him.
Adam had intercourse with Eve twice (Genesis chapter 1, verses 1 and 25), but Eve has three sons. This would seems to support Apprentice Anon's conclusion that Satan was sexually active with Eve. However, Cain and Abel may be identical twins or fraternal twins.
Saint Paul writes (2 Corinthians 11:3):
"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
"Beguiled" in this instance is translated from the Greek word "expatao" meaning "to decieve" (G1818). This does not support Apprentice Anon's conclusion, since deception does not always include a sexual component. The origins of "beguile" and "guile" do not posses any explicit sexual overtones.
"Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one..." (1 John 3:12). Unless Adam is referred to as the wicked one, it is reasonable to state that the author believes Cain to be the son of Satan.
Adam says Eve is "the mother of all living", but Eve does not state Adam is the father of all living. We can make the deduction that all children will be Eve's children, but not all the children will be Adam's children. This conclusion seems to support Apprentice Anon's conclusion that Satan had intercourse with Eve and, as a result, became pregnant.
In Genesis 4: 1-2, regarding Cain, Eve states "I have gotten a man from the Lord ". She does not say that the Lord God provided her a child, but only the "Lord".
"Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness." From this example, it may be stated that eating is an euphemism for adultery and this could be expanded to all forms of forbidden sexual relations.
The phrases "sons of God" and"daughters of man" could be understood as the descendants of Adam and Satan, respectably.
In light of the sexual context, we can understand why the Lord God did not prohibit Adam from touching the "tree", as a man he would have no interest in the "touching" it without the influence of Eve.
Adam and Eve made aprons and cover their respective sexual organs. Since they did not cover their mouths, we can reasonably conclude that their genitals, and not their mouths, were involved in the transgression, thereby supporting Apprentice Anon's conclusion.
Although Apprentice Anon Amus did not follow his research to its ultimate conclusion, he has made an excellent attempt to understand the meaning of Genesis Chapter 3. The evidence from the Hebrew language, Proverbs, and he Epistle of John all lend credence to the reasonable conclusion that Eve had intercourse with Satan and the descendants of Seth are called "daughters of man", whereas the descendants of Seth are called "the sons of God".
We are reminded of Fred's warning concerning the Bible-difficulties lurk behind every word- and these difficulties certainly apply to the translation of the Hebrew word "naga". We are confident that what transgressions occurred in the aptly named Garden of Delights was sexual in nature.
And, yes Apprentice Anon, this seduction must be applicable to Adam.
Vide Touched by Angel for additional commentary on the Garden of Eden.
Addendum- G.D.O'Bradovich III
Adam had intercourse with Eve twice (Genesis chapter 1, verses 1 and 25), but Eve has three sons. This would seems to support Apprentice Anon's conclusion that Satan was sexually active with Eve. However, Cain and Abel may be identical twins or fraternal twins.
Saint Paul writes (2 Corinthians 11:3):
"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
"Beguiled" in this instance is translated from the Greek word "expatao" meaning "to decieve" (G1818). This does not support Apprentice Anon's conclusion, since deception does not always include a sexual component. The origins of "beguile" and "guile" do not posses any explicit sexual overtones.
"Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one..." (1 John 3:12). Unless Adam is referred to as the wicked one, it is reasonable to state that the author believes Cain to be the son of Satan.
Adam says Eve is "the mother of all living", but Eve does not state Adam is the father of all living. We can make the deduction that all children will be Eve's children, but not all the children will be Adam's children. This conclusion seems to support Apprentice Anon's conclusion that Satan had intercourse with Eve and, as a result, became pregnant.
In Genesis 4: 1-2, regarding Cain, Eve states "I have gotten a man from the Lord ". She does not say that the Lord God provided her a child, but only the "Lord".
"Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness." From this example, it may be stated that eating is an euphemism for adultery and this could be expanded to all forms of forbidden sexual relations.
The phrases "sons of God" and"daughters of man" could be understood as the descendants of Adam and Satan, respectably.
In light of the sexual context, we can understand why the Lord God did not prohibit Adam from touching the "tree", as a man he would have no interest in the "touching" it without the influence of Eve.
Adam and Eve made aprons and cover their respective sexual organs. Since they did not cover their mouths, we can reasonably conclude that their genitals, and not their mouths, were involved in the transgression, thereby supporting Apprentice Anon's conclusion.
Although Apprentice Anon Amus did not follow his research to its ultimate conclusion, he has made an excellent attempt to understand the meaning of Genesis Chapter 3. The evidence from the Hebrew language, Proverbs, and he Epistle of John all lend credence to the reasonable conclusion that Eve had intercourse with Satan and the descendants of Seth are called "daughters of man", whereas the descendants of Seth are called "the sons of God".
We are reminded of Fred's warning concerning the Bible-difficulties lurk behind every word- and these difficulties certainly apply to the translation of the Hebrew word "naga". We are confident that what transgressions occurred in the aptly named Garden of Delights was sexual in nature.
And, yes Apprentice Anon, this seduction must be applicable to Adam.
Vide Touched by Angel for additional commentary on the Garden of Eden.
Addendum- G.D.O'Bradovich III