The Serpent of Genesis

[juliamajor]

juliamajor;4547866:

Good.

Now we bring Jesus into the debate.

*"But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. *

Was Jesus wrong?

Que? WHAT?
Clarify-right now your query is as clear as mud. I am perplexed

 

[nablaise]

Two things:

1. Even if this theory is correct, the question would then be, what made this reptilian race sin in the first place? Where did sin come from.
2. According to Scott Hahn, the word translated as serpent, in the original Hebrew means ‘sinister being’ (modern version: snake in the grass). This is the translation I go by, and I think it solves some problems.

For 1. I think it would still be the devil. We have to remember that Satan is a spirit. It does not make a big differance whether a fellow biological creature helped us to sin, or whether we did it directly under the influence of spiritual force.

1. What do you mean that it solve some problems?

God bless

 

[juliamajor]

There are a lot of blank spaces in Genesis. .Bits and pieces that are mysterious .The serpent-there is no explanation of why he is and why he does what he does. the idea of Satan is a long time coming and would not be what the writer had in mind. Snakes were symbols of fertility cults and pagan practices. could it be that the writer put out a subtle polemic on paganism?How it is poisonous to our relationship with God? What we know about "Creation stories " is that they are very old and were around orally for many centuries.And usually very expansive. What we see written is probably only a small fraction of the original story. These characters and archetypes would be very familiar to the audience.They could fill in any ‘blank spots’ because, culturally it would have been a story that the tribe or grandpa told them and they were completely at home with. What we see written is only bare bones. If we see any iconic name put out like say “Superman”, we know who he is, where he came from what his job is, etc. without having to be told and more of the story- we mentally fill in the blanks.So with Genesis.

 

[nablaise]

There are a lot of blank spaces in Genesis. .Bits and pieces that are mysterious .The serpent-there is no explanation of why he is and why he does what he does. the idea of Satan is a long time coming and would not be what the writer had in mind. Snakes were symbols of fertility cults and pagan practices. could it be that the writer put out a subtle polemic on paganism?How it is poisonous to our relationship with God? What we know about "Creation stories " is that they are very old and were around orally for many centuries.And usually very expansive. What we see written is probably only a small fraction of the original story. These characters and archetypes would be very familiar to the audience.They could fill in any ‘blank spots’ because, culturally it would have been a story that the tribe or grandpa told them and they were completely at home with. What we see written is only bare bones. If we see any iconic name put out like say “Superman”, we know who he is, where he came from what his job is, etc. without having to be told and more of the story- we mentally fill in the blanks.So with Genesis.

Interesting observation. Well, one of the consequences of sin is the loss of memory. I think oral tradition can go back to Adam and Eve themselves. So what they have been telling their childreen have been getting slightly modified perhaps out of negligeance or of sin. I think the origin of religions is actually in this fact of destorted information about the view of reality from father to son. And what was special in jews and hebrew was that being in the line of the first born of humanity (semites- of Shem) they and their parents had a greater responsability of keeping the original ‘reports’ unmodified and looking to it that it remains that way.

God bless