Adam, Eve, and Satan in the Garden

  • Thread starter Thread starter TK421
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please provide the proper citation, link, book, page number, publication title and publisher for this statement which appears in your post 13 above.
“Here is the point which both Dr. Scott Hahn and Jeff Cavins make in their Bible studies; if Adam and Eve had refused to eat then the ancient serpent would have killed them.”
St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology
Bible Study “Genesis to Jesus” by Dr. Scott Hahn
Lesson Two: Creation, Fall and Promise
Section 3c: Scared Unto Death

***C. Scared Unto Death? **

To put it bluntly: Adam was scared to death, scared of dying. He saw the serpent as a threat to his life.

We know that Adam understood what death was. How do we know that? Because God warned him that he if he ate the fruit he would die (see Genesis 2:17). If Adam didn’t know what death was, God’s warning wouldn’t have made any sense.

Adam was scared that if he didn’t do what the serpent wanted he would be made to suffer and die. *

Reference stpaulcenter.com/studies/lesson/lesson-two-creation-fall-and-promise

-Tim-
 
I really doubt God would have allowed Satan to kill them if they refused to eat, remember EVERYTHING that Satan does, he does only because God ALLOWS it, God obviously allowed Satan to come up to them in the garden and tempt them, Satan cannot act on his own.
It is postulated that Satan would have killed them but that God would have raised them from the dead.

God allows many bad things to happen, sometimes to show his glory.

-Tim-
 
It is postulated that Satan would have killed them but that God would have raised them from the dead.

God allows many bad things to happen, sometimes to show his glory.

-Tim-
I am still researching the first three chapters of Genesis for “Satan would have killed them”.

I understand that Genesis 3: 15 is considered the Protoevangelium (“first Gospel”) which announces the Messiah and Redeemer. (Information source: CCC 410-411)
Genesis 2: 15-17 is clearly stated as is Genesis 3: 11.

So far I have found the words of God in Genesis 1: 26; Genesis 2: 15-17; Genesis 3: 9-11, especially the words “Where are you?” God’s words and actions keep coming in Genesis 3: 13-24; especially the words of God in Genesis 3:15. God, not an ancient serpent, is in charge of His own relationship with Adam.

I did not find prophetic words about God specifically raising the specifically dead Adam and Eve.
 
I am still researching the first three chapters of Genesis for “Satan would have killed them”.

I understand that Genesis 3: 15 is considered the Protoevangelium (“first Gospel”) which announces the Messiah and Redeemer. (Information source: CCC 410-411)
Genesis 2: 15-17 is clearly stated as is Genesis 3: 11.

So far I have found the words of God in Genesis 1: 26; Genesis 2: 15-17; Genesis 3: 9-11, especially the words “Where are you?” God’s words and actions keep coming in Genesis 3: 13-24; especially the words of God in Genesis 3:15. God, not an ancient serpent, is in charge of His own relationship with Adam.

I did not find prophetic words about God specifically raising the specifically dead Adam and Eve.
Could God not have raised Adam and Eve?

You can search the scriptures (I suggest 1 Corinthians 6) but please consider how someone as learned as Scott Hahn could come up with such an idea.

It’s not my idea so please don’t work too hard to prove me wrong.

-Tim-
 
I suppose I could always just look in the references in the back of the book I’m reading 😛

Anyway, I was 99+% certain that Professor Scott Hahn wouldn’t have just whipped this idea up, but I never read anything quite like it before.

Here are the sources for the Serpent being a physically powerful beast that was threatening to Adam and Eve’s mortal lives (just a note in case there is confusion here: original innocence = / = indestructibility):

What is Love? by Scott Hahn
pg 68
“What is clear is that Adam faced a life threatening force…”

The identification of the serpent of the Fall with Satan, as a deadly dragon, is explicit in New Testament texts; see Rv 12:9 “The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan” (also Rev 20:2). For ancient Near Eastern, intertestamental, and rabbinic parallels, see Life of Adam and Eve, Apocalypse of Baruch, Testimony of Asher, Testimony of Solomon, Apocalypse of Abraham, Enoch.

A few modern texts treating the subject:
The Enemy King Is a Monster (NY: 1999), The Great Dragon Battle and Talmudic Redaction, Harvard University Press, 1998, "Slaying Leviathan: Cosmic Warfare and the Preservation and Restoration of Creation, 1997, Slaying the Dragon, 1992, The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth, 1987, Yhwh’s Combat with the Sea, 1986, God’s Battle with the Monster, 1973

The Catechism of the Catholic Church identifies the serpent as Satan (no. 391) and spells out the power he had to seduce Adam, but also to harm him physically and spiritually (nos. 395 and 394)
 
The scripture readings at the beginning of Genesis, like pretty much the entire Old Testament, can make a clearer level of sense when taken into fresh account with what we learn further from revelation in the New Covenant, although as I’ve cited, the idea of the Serpent being a physically threatening, powerful entity proceeds Christ in ancient Rabbinical texts.
 
I suppose I could always just look in the references in the back of the book I’m reading 😛
Thank you for the references!

I’m sure there is something about it in extra-biblical Jewish literature.

-Tim-
 
If Eve and Adam had refused to eat then the serpent would have physically killed them. Adam and Eve did not trust that God would have or could have raised them from the dead.
This is simply reading something into the text that is not there. Eve’s response of “ye shall surely die” was (though unknown to her in its literal sense) in reference to the loss of sanctifying grace, as so many theologians have stated throughout the centuries. Adam and Eve’s sin was one of disobedience to the one thing that God forbade them and has always been the constant, consistent teaching of the Church. Besides, being in a state of perfection, both Adam and Eve would have had no conception of fear of physical death from the serpent. I have no idea where you decipher a lack of trust in God to raise them from the dead as their sin. You cannot start at the back of the book and work your way to the front.
 
It was the one thing they were forbidden to do, but it wasn’t an issue until they were confronted with the Serpent (Satan), where they had to chose between saving their (earthly) life or betraying God. The decision at its heart was the same decision the Apostle Peter was confronted with on the eve of Christ’s crucifixion.

This interpretation predates Christ and is still valid in the Church. The Church doesn’t have “official teachings” on scripture, except for a tiny few select verses (such as when it needed to state that water was a necessary matter for baptism).
 
***C. Scared Unto Death? ***

To put it bluntly: Adam was scared to death, scared of dying. He saw the serpent as a threat to his life.

We know that Adam understood what death was. How do we know that? Because God warned him that he if he ate the fruit he would die (see Genesis 2:17). If Adam didn’t know what death was, God’s warning wouldn’t have made any sense.

Adam was scared that if he didn’t do what the serpent wanted he would be made to suffer and die.
To be blunt, this is a bunch of nonsense. For one, nowhere in the text are we told of the fear and anxiety of Adam in eating the fruit. In fact, when confronted, he blamed Eve for giving him the fruit, not his fear of the serpent! Eve, when asked “why did you do such a thing?” says that the serpent “tricked” her and so she ate. She didn’t say he threatened or coerced her. Had they acted under fear and duress then they wouldn’t have been culpable for what they did. God’s warning of death in eating the fruit was the loss of sanctifying grace, not death from the serpent. Even Milton didn’t take this tack in Paradise Lost. I fear that some modern-day theologians are doing what theoretical physicists are doing; turning long held ideas and opinions upside down simply for the sake of doing so.
 
It was the one thing they were forbidden to do, but it wasn’t an issue until they were confronted with the Serpent (Satan), where they had to chose between saving their (earthly) life or betraying God. The decision at its heart was the same decision the Apostle Peter was confronted with on the eve of Christ’s crucifixion.

This interpretation predates Christ and is still valid in the Church. The Church doesn’t have “official teachings” on scripture, except for a tiny few select verses (such as when it needed to state that water was a necessary matter for baptism).
Then why is it that as a life-long Catholic and having read many commentaries and writings on various things about the Bible and the teachings of the Church have I never heard this before? Please highlight for me, from the text of Genesis, where we are to perceive the mortal fear of Adam and Eve suffering a physical, violent death at the hands of the serpent. While you are at it, please also show me that the Church has always taught that the sin of our first parents was more than just disobedience but also a lack of faith in God to raise them from the dead.
 
This is simply reading something into the text that is not there. Eve’s response of “ye shall surely die” was (though unknown to her in its literal sense) in reference to the loss of sanctifying grace, as so many theologians have stated throughout the centuries. Adam and Eve’s sin was one of disobedience to the one thing that God forbade them and has always been the constant, consistent teaching of the Church. Besides, being in a state of perfection, both Adam and Eve would have had no conception of fear of physical death from the serpent. I have no idea where you decipher a lack of trust in God to raise them from the dead as their sin. You cannot start at the back of the book and work your way to the front.
I certainly can start at the back and work my way forward!

All scripture points to Christ. We read all scripture in the context of Jesus. Everything, from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 points to Jesus. Scripture starts with Jesus and ends with Jesus. This is called the allegorical sense of Scripture and is referenced in the Catechism 115 to 119. vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm

Animals and plants surely died in the garden before Adam and Eve sinned.

The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. (Genesis 2:15)

Why would God tell Adam to care for the garden if things didn’t die? Adam and Eve would have known about physical death through the death of plants and animals.

The Catechism says that their sin was disobedience and lack of trust.

*397: Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness. *

Trust and obedience go hand in hand. All sin is lack of trust, not just disobedience.

Anyway, it isn’t my interpretation. I didn’t make it up. Your beef is with Scott Hahn, Jeff Cavins and all the references in post 25. Just because you never heard of something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I’ve read the Bible cover to cover five times and have read many commentaries myself and only ran into this two years ago.

-Tim-
 
Wouldn’t pride have been one of the effects of the sin? How could they be prideful if this is so?
If not and the first humans were prideful before sinning, then how did they cause the fall?
Adam and Eve had perfect infused knowledge and did know what death meant or God wouldn’t have told them that without them understanding the consequences of disobedience.
Their sin was pride. Pride led to the Fall, they gave into it. Thinking they could be as good as God. So many today think they know more than God, or they don’t need Him cause they are smart enough to " go it on their own," We are in for a rude awakening, I’m afraid. God Bless, Memaw
 
I’ve heard something similar to this from professor Peter Kreeft. He also clarifies the meaning of the word we translate as “serpent” to be more appropriately translated as “dragon,” and that it was meant to convey the terrifying nature of the creature that they were confronted with. He doesn’t, however, goes as far as to say explicitly that they were scared for their lives.

But there are certainly other clues to this found throughout scripture. For example, the first reaction everyone in Scripture has at the appearance of an angel is fear, or terror. The first thing angels have to tell people when they appear to them, virtually without fail, is “do not be afraid.” From this, we should be able to figure out is that angels are terrifying. Evil angels that much more for their ugliness.

There are also other clues in the text that demonstrate Adam’s lack of trust. Consider the following. In Genesis 2:16-17, God gives Adam the command not to eat of the tree. In Genesis 2:21-22, God creates Eve. Therefore, God did not give the command to Eve, but to Adam only. This doesn’t mean the command didn’t apply to Eve, just that the command was given directly to Adam, and only indirectly to Eve. The assumption here is that Adam is the one who passed the command on to Eve.

And the command is this: “But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.”

But what does Eve say when the Serpent asks her about it? In Genesis 3:3, Eve says: “But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die.”

God did not command them not to touch it. We could perhaps surmise that Adam, fearing to be alone should Eve take it and die, told Eve not to even touch it, much less eat it.

But notice also that Eve doesn’t say “lest we die,” but rather “lest perhaps we die,” meaning that the question wasn’t settled. They might have died, they might not have. But God told Adam very clearly that he would die if he ate it.

So, one of three things is going on, even before the Serpent enters the scene. Either there is a certain level of distrust between Adam and Eve, such that Eve doubts the certainty of what Adam is telling her. Or, there is a certain level of distrust of God on Adam’s part, such that he is not certain that God’s declaration of death is true. Or, Eve, being terrified of the Serpent, may have felt insecure in her position, weakening it when proclaiming it, for fear of being taken the fool (evidence that this could be the case might be found in the Serpent’s question: “Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?” This could be read as subtly mocking, as though God were taking advantage of them, perhaps suggesting that “he isn’t forbidden, so why are they?”).

Either way, Eve didn’t receive God’s command directly, hearing it from Adam, and then repeats it back to the Serpent incorrectly. So Eve is starting at a point of disadvantage, a point of ignorance. Not invincible ignorance, but certainly she has a deficiency of knowledge compared to Adam, and so it is to her that the terrifying dragon approaches. She’s in a position of weakness, not by any fault of hers, but as a victim of circumstance. And being less certain than Adam, not receiving the command directly, she is more susceptible to deception. And that fits with the text, she spoke truly when she said the serpent deceived her.

But Adam’s failure first was defending his wife against the serpent, and his second failure was giving in to Eve’s offer. And of course, seeing that his wife ate of the tree without dying, he lost trust in God’s word that he would die. He might also have been afraid of losing his wife, having been alone before.

At any rate, the text is just packed with meaning.
 
When I was in grade school, I learned that the original Adam destroyed humanity’s original relationship with Divinity.

Now that I am finding out that an ancient dragon would eat Adam, that is, kill Adam for obeying God, the reality of Satan in today’s world makes perfect sense. My apology. I think fire breathing dragons who ate living things is in another story. No problem. The point is that Adam faced Satan no matter how it is described – just like we face Satan today. However, today Satan has enough sense not to appear as a dragon because surely someone would attempt to sell him to a zoo. Money is money.
 
Satan didn’t kill them because they ate. He knew that as soon as they ate they were going to die.

But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. (Genesis 3:4)

Remember that Satan is a liar. He knew they would die. The thing is that either way, whether they ate or not, they were going to die.

Remember all those people in the Bible who lives 800 and 500 and 150 years? The lifespan of people continuously decreased as time went on. This would have shocked the ancient Semitic readers not because people were living so long but because people were dying in the first place, and at progressively younger ages.

Adam and Eve would have lived forever if they had not eaten. But they ate, and they died. We inherit their original sin, we sin ourselves, and we die.

***For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. ***(1 Corinthians 14:21-22)

Here is the point which both Dr. Scott Hahn and Jeff Cavins make in their Bible studies; if Adam and Eve had refused to eat then the ancient serpent would have killed them. Like Christ they would have trusted God, and God would have raised them from the dead and they would have lived forever.

***For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. ***(Romans 6:23)

Satan didn’t kill them because they ate. He knew that as soon as they ate they were going to die.

-Tim-
I meant it as why didn’t satan just kill them, why bother with tempting them. They may have been protected against death/being killed because they were immortal. But yes once they had chosen their path and ate, satan didn’t have to do much.
 
I meant it as why didn’t satan just kill them, why bother with tempting them. They may have been protected against death/being killed because they were immortal. But yes once they had chosen their path and ate, satan didn’t have to do much.
My guess is that Satan wanted to see if they would eat.

Getting them to fall into sin was better than killing them. If he killed them in a state of innocence then they belonged to God. If he got them to fall into sin then they were his.

Either way they died.
 
My guess is that Satan wanted to see if they would eat.

Getting them to fall into sin was better than killing them. If he killed them in a state of innocence then they belonged to God. If he got them to fall into sin then they were his.

Either way they died.
They don’t belong to satan, he never created them.
 
They don’t belong to satan, he never created them.
God created all of us yet many belong to Satan.

1 John 3 talks about how we know who the children of the devil are.

1 Peter 5 talks about the devil devouring people.

-Tim-
 
Then why is it that as a life-long Catholic and having read many commentaries and writings on various things about the Bible and the teachings of the Church have I never heard this before? Please highlight for me, from the text of Genesis, where we are to perceive the mortal fear of Adam and Eve suffering a physical, violent death at the hands of the serpent. While you are at it, please also show me that the Church has always taught that the sin of our first parents was more than just disobedience but also a lack of faith in God to raise them from the dead.
This is the first time I ever heard of it, and protestantism has Catholics beat by a mile when it comes to let’s just say “creative” interpretations of the scripture 😛

Tim, what you’re asking me would involve preparing a report with references on my part, and to be frank, I don’t feel like setting aside the time in my schedule to do it. I have a list of some reference material on the previous page if you’re interested in pursuing this further. Scott Hahn is one of the most prestigious Catholic Bible scholars in North America and needless to say his books all have the nihil obstat, which at the very least demands that you don’t jettison this idea as in anyway contrary to the faith. The book is titled “What is Love” and Dr Hahn goes in far greater detail than the brief recap I’ve given in this thread. I think you’ll find it very enjoyable.

Good hunting.
They don’t belong to satan, he never created them.
“Belong” here referring to a union of persons. A wife “belongs” to her husband and a husband belongs to his wife. A person that separates themselves from God does indeed belong to Satan in a certain sense and scripture uses this kind of descriptive for it. They have been beguiled and enslaved by him, in the way a debtor belongs to a loan shark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top