RyuOni1989
New Member
A Concise Critical Review of the Biblical Creation Story
Introduction-
In this review, I would like to go through each point of the creation story, right up to the Expulsion from The Garden of Eden and provide a critical analysis. These analyses will refer to other belief systems and mythologies, aswell as sometimes going into a psychological review of certain aspects of Creation. Please understand that there is so much more which could be said, and I am trying to keep this as concise as possible. And even then, I fear it still wouldn't be concise enough.
Genesis is the first book in the Pentateuch, the five books attributed to have been written by Moses on Mount Sinai, these 5 books are the basis of the Abrahamic faiths; Judaism, Islam and Christianity, which are also the strongest beliefs in the Modern World.
The word Genesis comes from the Greek word meaning "Origin"- the Hebrew name however is "Bereshith" which means "in the beginning". So, let's start at the beginning.
The Two Creation Stories-
It's no secret that the creation story in the Bible isn't just in one part, but it's in two.
However, what's strange is that these two parts don't fully match up with each other.
One includes some things, the other doesn't, and they don't even keep the chronological order together either.
This fundamental part of the Bible is so riddled with problems that many Christians either choose to ignore them, or see past them as a metaphor for the greater picture.
Now, as mentioned earlier, the major difference between these two versions;
(Version one starting from Genesis 1:1-2:3, and version two continuing from Genesis 2:4-22)
Is that Version one (Hereby Referred to as A) looks at things from quite a distant perspective and describes things vaguely, noting the earth in particular as being "without form and void". Whereas Version Two (Hereby referred to as B) looks at things a little closer to home and depicts God like an architect, working directly with things, using more dynamic verbs such as "formed", "breathed" and "planted" in comparison to the "let us"¦ and it was so" reasoning.
Aswell as the dramatic change in perspective and tone, the two stories don't match with each other, as mentioned earlier.
Things mentioned in A such as Light, Sun, Moon, Stars, Fish (aswell as God's little holiday) aren't even mentioned in B. I could accept the oversight of fish, but things as great at the cosmos, it's getting a bit hazy. Also, vice versa, things in B, such as the creation of Eden itself and the Gold/Precious Materials aren't mentioned in A.
There are some other little things which apologetics could rationalize out such as the Rivers being included in A when it mentions the Waters. However the creation of Trees and Herbs are created separately in B, whereas they're created together in A.
As I mentioned earlier, there are those who rationalize this away by seeing it as a metaphor. The ones who come to this conclusion are usually the more intelligent of the Christians out there. However, there are those who cling to the fundamentalist view who maintain it is the absolute truth in all of its entirety. The argument they put forward is in a mistranslation. They argue that the word in the original Hebrew text ("Yatsar") could be translated as both the past tense "formed" and as the pluperfect "he had formed" which they see as a way to get out of this particular problem. They assert that Creation 1 is of the Chronological Order; Outline of Creation and Creating Animals, whereas Creation 2 is the Topical order; more detailed version, which sees to Name all the animals.
However, a problem to this explanation is that this translation can be applied to both version, A and B, and so both could be considered as chronological. If this is so, it stands to reason that the correct chronological order is in the order which they were written, and so this particular argument is weak and doesn't stand up to its own reasoning.
The Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil-
After creating the Garden of Eden, God places two trees in the centre; The Tree of Immortality and The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, the fruit of which was forbidden against by God. This particular theme isn't distinctive to the Bible; it has been used several times in religions that, by far, pre-date the Bible.
As stated earlier, the Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge is hardly something special to the Bible. In fact, a story containing the male, female, serpent and tree can be traced back 22 centuries before the Bible to a Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal (I believe it's called Enuma Elish?). This theme is recurrent later, in the Sumerian creation story; which is very Similar, if not Identical to the Mesopotamian, and is also mirrored in the Greek's "Garden of Hesperides".
In Buddhism, Buddha achieves enlightenment under the Tree of Bodhi- known as the Tree of Wisdom; this idea is also mirrored in the Veda Hinduistic belief of Tree of Jiva and Atman. In the Nordic belief, Yggdrasil, their tree of Life and Knowledge (combining the best of both) was theorized to be a sort of library; it's interesting to see that some are now starting to believe the same in Christianity's Tree of Knowledge [of Good and Evil].
Apologetics either disregard the similarities completely, or they point to them as evidence that their own religion is true. They claim that all religions started from one point and each diversified itself after the Tower of Babylon, confusing men's words and being scattered across the world. This means that all Religions can't be false if they have things in common with each other.
However, there is an explanation for this. Looking at David A. Leeming's book "Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion" he offers a Freudian perspective and states that;
"Gardens and Groves and other hidden places can represent an earthly paradise"¦They are places of Birth and Rebirth"¦Psychologically, the sacred place in question may be said to represent the Pre-Conscious Mind"¦The place where the Ego Resides and in which it achieves its revelation or awakening to Self. It is also the place threatened by outside forces"¦who, in a sense, shares the garden, the psyche- with the individual."
A good example of seeing such things today is in that of Children who create "Dens" or "Bases" from whatever they can find, as their own personal seclusion from the outside pressures of the natural world.
The main point of this particular area in the Creation story is to point out the fact that Trees and Gardens are not so special when it comes to Religion.
They represent life coming from perceived non-life in the ground, which then produce beauty in the leaves and flowers and quite often bear delicious fruits. It's because of this reason that Trees and other secluded areas are objects adoration and of Holy places in ancient culture, and even still today.
The Forbidden Fruit-
Next is the Forbidden fruit. The Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, of Good and Evil- which was forbidden to eat from by God.
Now, even though this is a relatively small point, the actual identity of the fruit has been of much debate throughout history and I thought it deserved a little notice.
It is an undoubtable fact that there are many fruits over the world, but it is interesting that different societies claim the Forbidden Fruit was a great many things;
For the Western Christians it is the Apple, Slavonic Texts and the Zohar say it is a Grape, Eastern Christians say it was a Fig, some Rabbinical teachings have it as Wheat, others have attributed it to the Tomato, and some argue that the fruit Quince was the Forbidden Fruit because it pre-dates many of the fruits we see today.
Why is it that different cultures state that this fruit was many things? The easiest answer is in the Language.
For the western Christians the fruit is an Apple, this comes from the Latin of the noun "Apple" which is "Malus", whereas the adjective means "Evil". The same applies to the Rabbinical Wheat theory, in which wheat ("Khitah") is similar to the word Sin ("Khet") in Hebrew. However, I could contend these by saying that even though God did forbid the consumption of such a fruit, The Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was never stated as being Evil itself, just that it was forbidden. Coming to the Grape, if we are to believe the Biblical word- Grapes weren't cultivated until after the Great Flood of Noah. Perhaps the Grape is attributed to the Forbidden Fruit because it has symbolism of decadence. But would you not think it strange that if the Grape was the Forbidden Fruit then why is Wine [from Grapes] so prominently featured in the Bible as a good thing, and why would it be served at ceremonies?
Some theologians are now starting to contest the fruit theory by saying that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was a type of library, and so an actual fruit would be impossible to distinguish. And I agree, because the actual identity of The Fruit of The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil will never be known because it will always be subject to cultural bias.
The Serpent-
The Serpent in the Bible is depicted as the animal which tells Eve to eat the Forbidden Fruit, and so for time ever after, man and serpent have always held a general dislike for one another. However, is this point solely in the Bible? Unfortunately for them, no, and I will explore reasons why.
But first I want to discuss why the snake is a reviled creature in the bible. For the most part, it is because of its traits in the wild, as well as its physical attributes.
The snake, with its forked tongue depicts the notion that what it says is untrustworthy because it does not have a single point, associated with a single truth. This can also be seen in lexical terms in which the overuse of the S sound usually connotates to untrustworthiness. (Try and think of as many positive words with a strong S sound in comparison to those whose connotation is negative)
With no limbs or any real way to get a grapple onto a snake (besides a dangerous, straight-out grab), it gives them the appearance of slippery creatures, able to escape any danger or mischief they had done.
Along with that, because the snake is usually an unseen predator they may be walked past by people unaware of its presence, and, acting in a defensive way, the snake will attack without perceived warning. This attack is seen as unwanted and vengeful by the victim, hence it's vindictive connotation.
Even though the serpent is not the only one to be found in regards to a tree or garden, it is interesting to note that it is the only one (or one of very few) which are depicted as a an antagonist of sorts. In relation to a Tree however, there are a few examples;
In Greek mythology, in the Garden of Hesperides the never-sleeping, many-headed snake Ladon guarded the tree which bore Golden Apples.
And again in Norse mythology, the great serpent Nidhogg would eat from the roots of Yggdrasil.
Also in Buddhism, while Buddha meditated under the Tree of Wisdom, the great Naga King Mucalinda rose up from the earth to defend him from the weather.
The Apologetic's response which shows this serpent as a being of evil is from the quote later on in Revelations 12:9
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world, he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." Because of this reason, the devil is the deceiver and has appeared many times throughout history to sway the hearts of man.
However, I would like to note that Snakes and Serpents have also been used as symbols of health and medicine.
From their physical trait of shedding skin it gave the ancient people the perception of Rebirth; shedding of the Old to continue with the New.
The snake's Poison, while most deadly has also had a great reputation for being a magnificent healer- when used correctly- being used in Alchemy in an effort to create the Elixir of Life. (As it was perceived to have the property of Fire.)
Because of this ability to kill, and also the [believed] ability to revive, the Snake is seen as an incredibly wise animal, being close to the God/s, or high up in whichever belief system there is.
The depiction of Snakes in ancient societies has been that of both Good and Bad, a combination of people's fear, respect and adoration for this creature. In regards to the Biblical terms however, they are almost always depicted as beings of vengeful vindictiveness, used for the work of both god and his adversaries. This shows that even in the Bible, the snake's power is understood to be used for both sides; it is just in this case that this particular snake's disposition is that of a deceiver.
The Fall-
The Fall is the term given to the event described in Genesis 3:1-24. In which Eve partakes of the forbidden fruit and offers it to Adam, who eats aswell. It is an effort to explain why human beings no longer live in a paradise close to god.
This theme, too, is also analogous throughout many religions and mythologies. The Fall is usually attributed to the acts of a particular woman; in the case of the Greeks, it was Pandora when she opened the Box out of which all the troubles of the world flew. The Blackfoot Indians of North America told of Feather-Woman who unleashes "great ills" when she digs up the Great Turnip after being told not to do so.
If we just solely focus on the Biblical story of The Fall, one could yet again attribute it to a very Freudian Perspective. Harold Ellens points to the numerous Freudian symbols in the Fall;
"The Serpent, Virgin, Flaming Sword, Nakedness, Anxiety, Shame, Phallic Deity and the initially non-phallic humans", however the main focus was that of the "Children" (Adam and Eve being in a state of pleasure, oblivious to the realities of the world, "the Ego") taking the fruit in order to be like God ("Super-Ego"), and once eating, as God states in Genesis 3:22 "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.", showing that God acknowledges the humans capacity for attaining knowledge, because they have matured into adults ("Id"). And so God banishes them from his home, his paradise, for them to toil in the wilderness and make their own homes.
A good, modern example of this would be of a parent bringing up their child, and once they've had enough help to sustain themselves, they are often sent out into the world by their parents to make their own home and family.
Despite the Freudian interpretation which could be drawn of this story the main purpose of it is to answer the question of all people; that if God created the world and everything in it as perfect, then why is there so much evil and corruption in it? This story seeks to answer it by saying that it is by our own free will that we rebelled against God and deserve to suffer in its consequences.
God's Reaction-
God's reaction to finding out of the disobedience is one of particular interest, it also provokes a couple of questions into just how Omniscient God really is, or if he let the events unfold as they did.
After Adam and Eve eat The Fruit of The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they become aware of their nakedness and hide themselves in shame. At this point, God comes down from heaven to enjoy the garden in "the cool of the day". The challenge of which is that if god is Omniscient, should he not have been able to know what was going on and stop the Fall before it happened?
There is a series of contradictions in the Bible referring to God's Omniscience and Omnipotence;
God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things - Proverbs 15:3 / Psalms 139:7-10 / Job 34:22,21
God is not everywhere present, neither sees nor knows all things - Genesis 3:8/11:5/18:20-21
God knows the hearts of men - Acts 1:24/ Psalms 139:2-3
God tries men to find out what is in their heart, Genesis 22:12 / Deuteronomy 8:2/13:3
God is all powerful - Jeremiah 32:27 / Matthew 19:26
God is not all powerful - Judges 1:19
In proverbs 15:3 it is stated that "The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good." Similar statements are also made throughout. However, if we look at just a few references in Genesis, God is portrayed as an actual being- who is just as aware about his surroundings as any other human, this directly contradicts his omniscience.
The apologetic's rationalization about these things is that god may be Omniscient if he chooses to be (which is a part of his omnipotence), kinda like flipping on and off a switch when need be. However there is another rationalization that because God gave free will to man, with which he cannot interfere (again, another contradiction, this time against his omnipotence, but whatever), that he knew about what was going on but didn't interfere because it would be a lesson for Man to learn from.
There is also another reason, which continues from a similar train of thought; Irenaeus, the Second Century Bishop of Lyons (c. 130-202) saw Adam and Eve not as perfect beings who "fell" into sin, but rather as imperfect, immature creatures who were at the beginning stages of a long process of moral development which would eventually be brought into perfection by God, which is why God did not interfere, because it was all part of the plan.
In conclusion, however, after finding all of this out, he sends Adam and Eve out of Eden to live out in the world of Thorns and Thistles. He sentences the Serpent to forever crawl on its belly and to forever eat dust. Adam is to toil in the forsaken lands. To Eve, God says
"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
This particular quote is interesting because Charles Pellegrino, a scientist-archaeologist, notes in his book "Return to Sodom and Gomorrah;
"Childbirth is more difficult for human beings than for any other known species, a price apparently paid to accommodate the brain's tripling in size during the past two million years." So in a manner of speaking, both Science and Genesis agree that Women have paid the price for humanity gaining knowledge with each offspring.
Conclusion-
So, now I've gotten to the end of Creation and the Fall and what is there to show for it?
Well, my opinion is that the Bible is a culmination of various stories and myths from around the world combined with ancient perceptions of nature and reality, which I hope I have successfully shown in this review. But in the end, what you believe really is down to you.
There is a lot more which could be delved into such as the true identity of The Serpent, which is REALLY the most likely to be the Forbidden Fruit, and so on- but I hope that whoever reads this, you may have learned a thing or two about the Biblical Creation Story and its Origins. If you haven't, however, and you know more- please leave a message, or send me some great reading material! It would be most useful.
(As a little Side-Note, I would like to mention that I am in the process of making this Review into a video to show on YouTube, please visit my channel; http://www.youtube.com/ryuoni1989 and also, take a look at my other videos- such as pwning a creationist named "TruthfulChristian" comments, ratings and subscriptions will be greatly appreciated!)
References;
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND PSYCHOLOGY, DAVID A. LEEMING
CONCISE DICTIONARY OF RELIGION, IRVING HEXHAM
DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE BIBLE, KENNETH C. DAVIS
THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF WORLD RELIGIONS, ROBERT S. ELLWOOD
THE HOLY BIBLE, KING JAMES VERSION
WIKIPEDIA, VARIOUS PAGES, VARIOUS SOURCES
Introduction-
In this review, I would like to go through each point of the creation story, right up to the Expulsion from The Garden of Eden and provide a critical analysis. These analyses will refer to other belief systems and mythologies, aswell as sometimes going into a psychological review of certain aspects of Creation. Please understand that there is so much more which could be said, and I am trying to keep this as concise as possible. And even then, I fear it still wouldn't be concise enough.
Genesis is the first book in the Pentateuch, the five books attributed to have been written by Moses on Mount Sinai, these 5 books are the basis of the Abrahamic faiths; Judaism, Islam and Christianity, which are also the strongest beliefs in the Modern World.
The word Genesis comes from the Greek word meaning "Origin"- the Hebrew name however is "Bereshith" which means "in the beginning". So, let's start at the beginning.
The Two Creation Stories-
It's no secret that the creation story in the Bible isn't just in one part, but it's in two.
However, what's strange is that these two parts don't fully match up with each other.
One includes some things, the other doesn't, and they don't even keep the chronological order together either.
This fundamental part of the Bible is so riddled with problems that many Christians either choose to ignore them, or see past them as a metaphor for the greater picture.
Now, as mentioned earlier, the major difference between these two versions;
(Version one starting from Genesis 1:1-2:3, and version two continuing from Genesis 2:4-22)
Is that Version one (Hereby Referred to as A) looks at things from quite a distant perspective and describes things vaguely, noting the earth in particular as being "without form and void". Whereas Version Two (Hereby referred to as B) looks at things a little closer to home and depicts God like an architect, working directly with things, using more dynamic verbs such as "formed", "breathed" and "planted" in comparison to the "let us"¦ and it was so" reasoning.
Aswell as the dramatic change in perspective and tone, the two stories don't match with each other, as mentioned earlier.
Things mentioned in A such as Light, Sun, Moon, Stars, Fish (aswell as God's little holiday) aren't even mentioned in B. I could accept the oversight of fish, but things as great at the cosmos, it's getting a bit hazy. Also, vice versa, things in B, such as the creation of Eden itself and the Gold/Precious Materials aren't mentioned in A.
There are some other little things which apologetics could rationalize out such as the Rivers being included in A when it mentions the Waters. However the creation of Trees and Herbs are created separately in B, whereas they're created together in A.
As I mentioned earlier, there are those who rationalize this away by seeing it as a metaphor. The ones who come to this conclusion are usually the more intelligent of the Christians out there. However, there are those who cling to the fundamentalist view who maintain it is the absolute truth in all of its entirety. The argument they put forward is in a mistranslation. They argue that the word in the original Hebrew text ("Yatsar") could be translated as both the past tense "formed" and as the pluperfect "he had formed" which they see as a way to get out of this particular problem. They assert that Creation 1 is of the Chronological Order; Outline of Creation and Creating Animals, whereas Creation 2 is the Topical order; more detailed version, which sees to Name all the animals.
However, a problem to this explanation is that this translation can be applied to both version, A and B, and so both could be considered as chronological. If this is so, it stands to reason that the correct chronological order is in the order which they were written, and so this particular argument is weak and doesn't stand up to its own reasoning.
The Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil-
After creating the Garden of Eden, God places two trees in the centre; The Tree of Immortality and The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, the fruit of which was forbidden against by God. This particular theme isn't distinctive to the Bible; it has been used several times in religions that, by far, pre-date the Bible.
As stated earlier, the Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge is hardly something special to the Bible. In fact, a story containing the male, female, serpent and tree can be traced back 22 centuries before the Bible to a Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal (I believe it's called Enuma Elish?). This theme is recurrent later, in the Sumerian creation story; which is very Similar, if not Identical to the Mesopotamian, and is also mirrored in the Greek's "Garden of Hesperides".
In Buddhism, Buddha achieves enlightenment under the Tree of Bodhi- known as the Tree of Wisdom; this idea is also mirrored in the Veda Hinduistic belief of Tree of Jiva and Atman. In the Nordic belief, Yggdrasil, their tree of Life and Knowledge (combining the best of both) was theorized to be a sort of library; it's interesting to see that some are now starting to believe the same in Christianity's Tree of Knowledge [of Good and Evil].
Apologetics either disregard the similarities completely, or they point to them as evidence that their own religion is true. They claim that all religions started from one point and each diversified itself after the Tower of Babylon, confusing men's words and being scattered across the world. This means that all Religions can't be false if they have things in common with each other.
However, there is an explanation for this. Looking at David A. Leeming's book "Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion" he offers a Freudian perspective and states that;
"Gardens and Groves and other hidden places can represent an earthly paradise"¦They are places of Birth and Rebirth"¦Psychologically, the sacred place in question may be said to represent the Pre-Conscious Mind"¦The place where the Ego Resides and in which it achieves its revelation or awakening to Self. It is also the place threatened by outside forces"¦who, in a sense, shares the garden, the psyche- with the individual."
A good example of seeing such things today is in that of Children who create "Dens" or "Bases" from whatever they can find, as their own personal seclusion from the outside pressures of the natural world.
The main point of this particular area in the Creation story is to point out the fact that Trees and Gardens are not so special when it comes to Religion.
They represent life coming from perceived non-life in the ground, which then produce beauty in the leaves and flowers and quite often bear delicious fruits. It's because of this reason that Trees and other secluded areas are objects adoration and of Holy places in ancient culture, and even still today.
The Forbidden Fruit-
Next is the Forbidden fruit. The Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, of Good and Evil- which was forbidden to eat from by God.
Now, even though this is a relatively small point, the actual identity of the fruit has been of much debate throughout history and I thought it deserved a little notice.
It is an undoubtable fact that there are many fruits over the world, but it is interesting that different societies claim the Forbidden Fruit was a great many things;
For the Western Christians it is the Apple, Slavonic Texts and the Zohar say it is a Grape, Eastern Christians say it was a Fig, some Rabbinical teachings have it as Wheat, others have attributed it to the Tomato, and some argue that the fruit Quince was the Forbidden Fruit because it pre-dates many of the fruits we see today.
Why is it that different cultures state that this fruit was many things? The easiest answer is in the Language.
For the western Christians the fruit is an Apple, this comes from the Latin of the noun "Apple" which is "Malus", whereas the adjective means "Evil". The same applies to the Rabbinical Wheat theory, in which wheat ("Khitah") is similar to the word Sin ("Khet") in Hebrew. However, I could contend these by saying that even though God did forbid the consumption of such a fruit, The Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was never stated as being Evil itself, just that it was forbidden. Coming to the Grape, if we are to believe the Biblical word- Grapes weren't cultivated until after the Great Flood of Noah. Perhaps the Grape is attributed to the Forbidden Fruit because it has symbolism of decadence. But would you not think it strange that if the Grape was the Forbidden Fruit then why is Wine [from Grapes] so prominently featured in the Bible as a good thing, and why would it be served at ceremonies?
Some theologians are now starting to contest the fruit theory by saying that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was a type of library, and so an actual fruit would be impossible to distinguish. And I agree, because the actual identity of The Fruit of The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil will never be known because it will always be subject to cultural bias.
The Serpent-
The Serpent in the Bible is depicted as the animal which tells Eve to eat the Forbidden Fruit, and so for time ever after, man and serpent have always held a general dislike for one another. However, is this point solely in the Bible? Unfortunately for them, no, and I will explore reasons why.
But first I want to discuss why the snake is a reviled creature in the bible. For the most part, it is because of its traits in the wild, as well as its physical attributes.
The snake, with its forked tongue depicts the notion that what it says is untrustworthy because it does not have a single point, associated with a single truth. This can also be seen in lexical terms in which the overuse of the S sound usually connotates to untrustworthiness. (Try and think of as many positive words with a strong S sound in comparison to those whose connotation is negative)
With no limbs or any real way to get a grapple onto a snake (besides a dangerous, straight-out grab), it gives them the appearance of slippery creatures, able to escape any danger or mischief they had done.
Along with that, because the snake is usually an unseen predator they may be walked past by people unaware of its presence, and, acting in a defensive way, the snake will attack without perceived warning. This attack is seen as unwanted and vengeful by the victim, hence it's vindictive connotation.
Even though the serpent is not the only one to be found in regards to a tree or garden, it is interesting to note that it is the only one (or one of very few) which are depicted as a an antagonist of sorts. In relation to a Tree however, there are a few examples;
In Greek mythology, in the Garden of Hesperides the never-sleeping, many-headed snake Ladon guarded the tree which bore Golden Apples.
And again in Norse mythology, the great serpent Nidhogg would eat from the roots of Yggdrasil.
Also in Buddhism, while Buddha meditated under the Tree of Wisdom, the great Naga King Mucalinda rose up from the earth to defend him from the weather.
The Apologetic's response which shows this serpent as a being of evil is from the quote later on in Revelations 12:9
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world, he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." Because of this reason, the devil is the deceiver and has appeared many times throughout history to sway the hearts of man.
However, I would like to note that Snakes and Serpents have also been used as symbols of health and medicine.
From their physical trait of shedding skin it gave the ancient people the perception of Rebirth; shedding of the Old to continue with the New.
The snake's Poison, while most deadly has also had a great reputation for being a magnificent healer- when used correctly- being used in Alchemy in an effort to create the Elixir of Life. (As it was perceived to have the property of Fire.)
Because of this ability to kill, and also the [believed] ability to revive, the Snake is seen as an incredibly wise animal, being close to the God/s, or high up in whichever belief system there is.
The depiction of Snakes in ancient societies has been that of both Good and Bad, a combination of people's fear, respect and adoration for this creature. In regards to the Biblical terms however, they are almost always depicted as beings of vengeful vindictiveness, used for the work of both god and his adversaries. This shows that even in the Bible, the snake's power is understood to be used for both sides; it is just in this case that this particular snake's disposition is that of a deceiver.
The Fall-
The Fall is the term given to the event described in Genesis 3:1-24. In which Eve partakes of the forbidden fruit and offers it to Adam, who eats aswell. It is an effort to explain why human beings no longer live in a paradise close to god.
This theme, too, is also analogous throughout many religions and mythologies. The Fall is usually attributed to the acts of a particular woman; in the case of the Greeks, it was Pandora when she opened the Box out of which all the troubles of the world flew. The Blackfoot Indians of North America told of Feather-Woman who unleashes "great ills" when she digs up the Great Turnip after being told not to do so.
If we just solely focus on the Biblical story of The Fall, one could yet again attribute it to a very Freudian Perspective. Harold Ellens points to the numerous Freudian symbols in the Fall;
"The Serpent, Virgin, Flaming Sword, Nakedness, Anxiety, Shame, Phallic Deity and the initially non-phallic humans", however the main focus was that of the "Children" (Adam and Eve being in a state of pleasure, oblivious to the realities of the world, "the Ego") taking the fruit in order to be like God ("Super-Ego"), and once eating, as God states in Genesis 3:22 "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.", showing that God acknowledges the humans capacity for attaining knowledge, because they have matured into adults ("Id"). And so God banishes them from his home, his paradise, for them to toil in the wilderness and make their own homes.
A good, modern example of this would be of a parent bringing up their child, and once they've had enough help to sustain themselves, they are often sent out into the world by their parents to make their own home and family.
Despite the Freudian interpretation which could be drawn of this story the main purpose of it is to answer the question of all people; that if God created the world and everything in it as perfect, then why is there so much evil and corruption in it? This story seeks to answer it by saying that it is by our own free will that we rebelled against God and deserve to suffer in its consequences.
God's Reaction-
God's reaction to finding out of the disobedience is one of particular interest, it also provokes a couple of questions into just how Omniscient God really is, or if he let the events unfold as they did.
After Adam and Eve eat The Fruit of The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they become aware of their nakedness and hide themselves in shame. At this point, God comes down from heaven to enjoy the garden in "the cool of the day". The challenge of which is that if god is Omniscient, should he not have been able to know what was going on and stop the Fall before it happened?
There is a series of contradictions in the Bible referring to God's Omniscience and Omnipotence;
God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things - Proverbs 15:3 / Psalms 139:7-10 / Job 34:22,21
God is not everywhere present, neither sees nor knows all things - Genesis 3:8/11:5/18:20-21
God knows the hearts of men - Acts 1:24/ Psalms 139:2-3
God tries men to find out what is in their heart, Genesis 22:12 / Deuteronomy 8:2/13:3
God is all powerful - Jeremiah 32:27 / Matthew 19:26
God is not all powerful - Judges 1:19
In proverbs 15:3 it is stated that "The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good." Similar statements are also made throughout. However, if we look at just a few references in Genesis, God is portrayed as an actual being- who is just as aware about his surroundings as any other human, this directly contradicts his omniscience.
The apologetic's rationalization about these things is that god may be Omniscient if he chooses to be (which is a part of his omnipotence), kinda like flipping on and off a switch when need be. However there is another rationalization that because God gave free will to man, with which he cannot interfere (again, another contradiction, this time against his omnipotence, but whatever), that he knew about what was going on but didn't interfere because it would be a lesson for Man to learn from.
There is also another reason, which continues from a similar train of thought; Irenaeus, the Second Century Bishop of Lyons (c. 130-202) saw Adam and Eve not as perfect beings who "fell" into sin, but rather as imperfect, immature creatures who were at the beginning stages of a long process of moral development which would eventually be brought into perfection by God, which is why God did not interfere, because it was all part of the plan.
In conclusion, however, after finding all of this out, he sends Adam and Eve out of Eden to live out in the world of Thorns and Thistles. He sentences the Serpent to forever crawl on its belly and to forever eat dust. Adam is to toil in the forsaken lands. To Eve, God says
"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
This particular quote is interesting because Charles Pellegrino, a scientist-archaeologist, notes in his book "Return to Sodom and Gomorrah;
"Childbirth is more difficult for human beings than for any other known species, a price apparently paid to accommodate the brain's tripling in size during the past two million years." So in a manner of speaking, both Science and Genesis agree that Women have paid the price for humanity gaining knowledge with each offspring.
Conclusion-
So, now I've gotten to the end of Creation and the Fall and what is there to show for it?
Well, my opinion is that the Bible is a culmination of various stories and myths from around the world combined with ancient perceptions of nature and reality, which I hope I have successfully shown in this review. But in the end, what you believe really is down to you.
There is a lot more which could be delved into such as the true identity of The Serpent, which is REALLY the most likely to be the Forbidden Fruit, and so on- but I hope that whoever reads this, you may have learned a thing or two about the Biblical Creation Story and its Origins. If you haven't, however, and you know more- please leave a message, or send me some great reading material! It would be most useful.
(As a little Side-Note, I would like to mention that I am in the process of making this Review into a video to show on YouTube, please visit my channel; http://www.youtube.com/ryuoni1989 and also, take a look at my other videos- such as pwning a creationist named "TruthfulChristian" comments, ratings and subscriptions will be greatly appreciated!)
References;
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND PSYCHOLOGY, DAVID A. LEEMING
CONCISE DICTIONARY OF RELIGION, IRVING HEXHAM
DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE BIBLE, KENNETH C. DAVIS
THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF WORLD RELIGIONS, ROBERT S. ELLWOOD
THE HOLY BIBLE, KING JAMES VERSION
WIKIPEDIA, VARIOUS PAGES, VARIOUS SOURCES
