The 'Snake'. Eve, and Adam - the Kinship We Share.

Have you ever had a religious revelation? I did and I would like to try and explain what I learnt. It has to do with Genesis. I'm not going to quote chapters and verse, I think we are familiar with the territory.

Just a quick refresher: Eve was tempted by the snake to eat the apple which Eve in turn convinced Adam to eat. God discovered what they done had and put a curse on Eve and on the snake. Eve eventually gave birth, firstly to Cain to be followed by Able. Cain ended up murdering Able.

Okay. Here we go. This what I was shown to be what actually happened.

The 'snake', which is universally believed to be a male, is in fact female. As a female it cultivated Eve's friendship and trust and Eve, being totally innocent, fell for it. When the snake tempted Eve to eat the apple she allowed herself to be led because she had no concept of the treachery the snake was planning.

The whole aim of the snake's deception was to seduce Adam but first it had to get him to eat the apple which it succeeded in doing though Eve.

By the time God arrived on the scene Adam had already not only eaten the forbidden fruit but he had also been seduced by the female 'snake'. The latter was the reason for God's wrath. He immediately saw what had taken place during his absence and he realized that the creation in his own image had been compromised.

As a consequence of this tragedy Cain, the first born, was a child of Adam and the 'snake'. Cain grew up bearing traits of both a child of God and a child of the Beast. The second born was the issue of Eve and Adam and was of course favored by God but Cain, whose blood was not pure but contained the elements of corruption killed Able in a fit of envy revealing the bestial side if his nature.

This is why it is said that we are all in sin because we carry in us the same God - Beast nature of Cain. The passage of time however has had the effect of thinning the bestial nature of many but certainly not all.

Not all of us carry the blood-line of Cain, obviously, because Adam and Eve had other children whose blood is pure and while there has been much cross-breeding there are ancestral lines that have remained pure.

Quite early in Genesis God expresses his disappointment in man and doesn't think he will be able to suffer them for long. His disappointment turned to anger and we see the expression of this throughout the old testament.

God is not Everything, the existence of the 'snake' shows this. Yes God created us and he created our world first but somehow it was invaded by something from outside that exists on a far lower level than God which is possibly why it was able to get in under the radar and mess up God's original plan. But enough said.

I am aware that I haven't done justice to this subject that it deserves and hope you understand what I've written.

One problem:

your theory has absolutely no textual support... and if you're going to consider Genesis 3 reliable enough to base a theory on, you're going to need to be consistent in providing textual support and context to your argument.

...you have neither.

reply to post by Shema


I have always suspected Adams first wife was the snake....Lilith
"The Hebrew term Lilith first occurs in Isaiah 34:14, either singular or plural according to variations in the earliest manuscripts, though in a list of animals.In the Dead Sea Scrolls Songs of the Sage the term first occurs in a list of monsters. In Jewish magical inscriptions, on bowls and amulets from the 6th century CE onwards, Lilith is identified as a female demon and the first visual depictions appear.

" Note that her first appearance is in a list of animals...

Originally posted by Awen24
One problem:

your theory has absolutely no textual support... and if you're going to consider Genesis 3 reliable enough to base a theory on, you're going to need to be consistent in providing textual support and context to your argument.

...you have neither.

I don't see where I need it. Where does it say the snake is not female. I wish to inform you that this is not a theory. I had hoped I made that quite clear in the opening sentence. I am not therefore presenting an argument, I am simply trying to relate what was revealed to me. Its nothing to me whether you believe it or not but I would hope that some individuals might give it due consideration.

reply to post by ParanoidAmerican


Yes that is interesting, I haven't come upon that name before. I should do some research I suppose but to be honest I'm not the researching type. I have a peculiar relationship with God and I'm not even religious, sounds odd I know but I feel I can truly profess to know God in a way that no one else shares. This developed during a period when I determined to find out whether God existed or not, I needed to know one way or the other. I did something outrageous in the sight of God which I wont describe and eventually attracted his focus. Quite a moment I can tell you. He almost destroyed me there and then such was his anger. Since then, God has allowed me a little favor. saved me from myself a few times and quite frequently shows me something that simply blows me away. This is my first attempt to write about this. I always had the feeling that what God shows me is personal between him and myself, confidential, and I've kept that it way.

Its time the Adam and Eve story was clarified and this is what I want to do.

Originally posted by Awen24
One problem:

your theory has absolutely no textual support... and if you're going to consider Genesis 3 reliable enough to base a theory on, you're going to need to be consistent in providing textual support and context to your argument.

...you have neither.

Take one of these and post back in the AM...

reply to post by Shema

Where does it say the snake is not female.

The snake was Satan. Angels have the power to shape shift into any form that they want....there are heaps of quotes from top New Age occultist Blavatsky in her book 'The Secret Doctrine that admit that Satan was the serpent as well references in the Bible. Satan is neither male or female and thus doesn't mind being worshiped under the names of Osiris (male) or Isis (female) ect all through various pagan religions.

All the angels that appeared before God's people to give them messages ect in the Bible appeared as men though, whether they are actually 'male' is up to debate. God created all the angels and thus their was no need for angels to reproduce because they were to live forever. Jesus in His pre-incarnate form (a male though) created Adam first though and then Eve created from out of Adam.

We hear in Genesis 6 or the forbidden interactions of the fallen angels producing offspring with terrestrial females. It would be speculation on my part to assume how this occurred. Mostly, this topic is rather pointless...to suggest that the snake was female based on no evidence but just made up revelations when the evidence is that the snake was Satan who is not female tends to indicate you need to do something more useful with your time

reply to post by JesuitGarlic


The mish - mash of nonsense some people have in their heads is a worry.

You mention Madam Blavinsky, the 'top New Age Occultist' who lived and died well before the term New Age was ever coined and you obviously believe that her authority as a biblical translator is impeachable. As a one-time Theosophist myself I find the words Blavinsky and charlatan sit well together.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Satan is the snake, or that he is even evil. But maybe you would care to cite the relevant passages in the bible you claim exist, or are you simply relying on Blavinsky's say-so?

Genesis 6 makes no mention of 'fallen Angels mating with terrestrial females'. But you do seem to have a problem understanding anything. Is that why you need the Blavinsky's of this world to sort the world out for you? No wonder your mind is in such a confusion.

You would be well advised to get in touch with God, at least try.

At the end of your post you articulate your opinion on my thread, that it is a made-up revelation, in your own words. If only you had said that first and spared me the diatribe.

And you, my friend, need to do something about cleaning your mind of all that nonsense floating around like it owns the place.

reply to post by Shema


I initially just wanted to see what this OP was about since I'm interested in creation legends of all kinds, but I was compelled to respond after reading your last post.

1. I'll clearly articulate right up front for you so you don't necessarily have to read the rest of my own "diatribe". I, in my opinion, believe that your OP is a made-up revelation.

2. You have a fairly denigrating attitude towards people that don't agree with you, while not even seeing your own hypocrisy. Re: www.abovetopsecret.com

3. Yes, in fact Genesis 6 does speak of fallen angels having children with women.

2 and sons of God see the daughters of men that they [are] fair, and they take to themselves women of all whom they have chosen.

...then...

4 The fallen ones were in the earth in those days, and even afterwards when sons of God come in unto daughters of men, and they have borne to them -- they [are] the heroes, who, from of old, [are] the men of name.

Source

4. You've never heard of Lilith and are also unaware of what's in Genesis, and claim to have a "peculiar relationship with God". But he/she/it neglected to mention Lilith or about the stuff he/she/it supposedly had written? He/she/it didn't tell you something along the lines of "Look, if we're going to clarify this Adam and Eve story for everyone, here's a few things you'll need to know..."?

5. Awen24 was right in a sense. You have nothing to support your claim. Except, of course, you saying so. Problem is, I'm just as likely (not at all) to believe the crazy homeless guy on the corner that says God talks to him, or someone like L. Ron Hubbard's stories, as I am you.

6. I'd hope that you'd take some of this as constructive criticism. If God is speaking through you, then I would expect somewhere in his holy book there would be some passage somewhere to corroborate your revelation. At least in some small part. You're attempting to pass off what appears to be speculation or fantasy as fact.

Some of you are being VERY deceived by the the 'Snake' AKA the father of all lies...

Don't make the same mistake that Eve made ("the serpent beguiled Eve")

Some of us are SO caught up in arguing about doctrine that we forget what the doctrine IS.

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” II Corinthians 11:3

'Revelation' was written because it REVEALS something...

One of the things it reveals is that the serpent of Genesis 3 was in fact Satan in disguise:

...that the serpent is called “the devil and Satan.” Revelation 12:9, 20:2

Ezekiel 28:13 says of Satan: “Thou hast been in Eden the Garden of God...”

Cool story bro.

So we became damned because we ate an apple?

reply to post by Murgatroid


I absolutely love that avatar! Just noticed it moves.
"Damn your eyes!"
"Too late."

Anyway, I don't see the passages in Revelations as relating to the serpent in Eden. Florid prose, like much of Revelations, but there's no direct link to the serpent in Genesis. If the link is merely that it says "serpent", then what of Exodus 7:12 or Exodus 4 and the staff Moses carried turning into a serpent and back again? If it's because it says "old serpent", could that not be because he has existed since the very creation, thus, quite ancient?

Ezekiel 28:13 is in reference to the king of Tyre, not Satan. So we're still at the point of having no reference stating the serpent in Eden was Satan.

reply to post by LuckyLucian


Thanks for your post.

I am a straight shooter and it that comes across as a denigrating attitude to you, okay I'll live with it, but I fail to see how you manage to fit hyprocacy in.

A revelation isn't a 'chat' with God. A revelation is what God shows someone. It comes in its entirety, you see it complete which is why trying to put it into words is a hazardous exercise.

God, as I said in my thread, turned his focus upon me in anger at my termidity. I beleive there is a quote from God in the bible which goes something like:' who would dare to approach me uninvited?' Well that is exactly what I did. What do I care if you don't beleive me? I don't expect anyone will but that doesn't mean I can't talk about it.

Again, God doesn't talk to me, he reveals aspects of life to me that I had no conception of previously. As you have never been given a revelation I don't expect you to understand me.

I have nothing against constructive criticism, I welcome it but I think I am quite capable of sieving criticism from nonsense.

Finally, I am not attempting to pass anything off. I am not a bible scholar, The only thing I do know is that the bible can be interpreted in many ways, Really I am not interested in what the bible might or might not say on this particular or on that particular, I just want to tell others what God revealed to me. You don't believe me okay, so what's new?

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Cool story bro.

So we became damned because we ate an apple?

We became damned, if you can put it that way, because poor Adam was seduced. But you can't put the blame on him because he , like Eve, was tricked. God blamed all three involved but that was because he knew creation in his own image had been corrupted. His grand design had been compromised before it had a chance to become.

reply to post by Shema


Fair enough. I appreciate you explaining a bit in a reasonable manner. So long as we understand where each other is coming from, I'm good. I was just bothered by the way you said something like "having a problem understanding anything" in response to JesuitGarlic. I think if you truly feel you have something revelatory to tell people then you can't attack them in that manner. It undercuts your message. They're no longer thinking about the message, but the rudeness of the messenger.

So, to the message: what you're trying to express, in a nutshell, is that the serpent was a female who gave birth to Cain, yes?

Originally posted by Shema

Have you ever had a religious revelation? I did and I would like to try and explain what I learnt. It has to do with Genesis. I'm not going to quote chapters and verse, I think we are familiar with the territory.

Just a quick refresher: Eve was tempted by the snake to eat the apple which Eve in turn convinced Adam to eat. God discovered what they done had and put a curse on Eve and on the snake. Eve eventually gave birth, firstly to Cain to be followed by Able. Cain ended up murdering Able.

Okay. Here we go. This what I was shown to be what actually happened.

The 'snake', which is universally believed to be a male, is in fact female. As a female it cultivated Eve's friendship and trust and Eve, being totally innocent, fell for it. When the snake tempted Eve to eat the apple she allowed herself to be led because she had no concept of the treachery the snake was planning.

The whole aim of the snake's deception was to seduce Adam but first it had to get him to eat the apple which it succeeded in doing though Eve.

By the time God arrived on the scene Adam had already not only eaten the forbidden fruit but he had also been seduced by the female 'snake'. The latter was the reason for God's wrath. He immediately saw what had taken place during his absence and he realized that the creation in his own image had been compromised.

As a consequence of this tragedy Cain, the first born, was a child of Adam and the 'snake'. Cain grew up bearing traits of both a child of God and a child of the Beast. The second born was the issue of Eve and Adam and was of course favored by God but Cain, whose blood was not pure but contained the elements of corruption killed Able in a fit of envy revealing the bestial side if his nature.

This is why it is said that we are all in sin because we carry in us the same God - Beast nature of Cain. The passage of time however has had the effect of thinning the bestial nature of many but certainly not all.

Not all of us carry the blood-line of Cain, obviously, because Adam and Eve had other children whose blood is pure and while there has been much cross-breeding there are ancestral lines that have remained pure.

Quite early in Genesis God expresses his disappointment in man and doesn't think he will be able to suffer them for long. His disappointment turned to anger and we see the expression of this throughout the old testament.

God is not Everything, the existence of the 'snake' shows this. Yes God created us and he created our world first but somehow it was invaded by something from outside that exists on a far lower level than God which is possibly why it was able to get in under the radar and mess up God's original plan. But enough said.

I am aware that I haven't done justice to this subject that it deserves and hope you understand what I've written.

Please don't take my opinion pejoratively and see it as constructive.

First off, I don't believe God "discovered" per se that Adam and Eve ate the apple... That's what the text says and the text is in the perspective of the writer, thus it is second hand knowledge. Second hand knowledge serves a purpose, and I really hope you figure out what that purpose is. That being said, I think you are reaching for something that isn't there.

I think God knew that mankind would eat of the fruit.

Second, how did you come upon this religious revelation?

Third, did you ask God for confirmation on your theory?

His grand design had been compromised before it had a chance to become.

Do you really think so? I don't. I think this "fall" is part of the great design...

Originally posted by Shema

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Cool story bro.

So we became damned because we ate an apple?

We became damned, if you can put it that way, because poor Adam was seduced. But you can't put the blame on him because he , like Eve, was tricked. God blamed all three involved but that was because he knew creation in his own image had been corrupted. His grand design had been compromised before it had a chance to become.

We became damned because we ate the metaphorical "fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil". It is the knowledge of good an evil in and of itself that is damning us.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas


Thanks. I believe respect is a two-way street and I usually respond disrespectfully to anyone who approaches me in the same manner. Which, happily, you haven't.

You might be right that God knew Adam and Eve would eventually partake of the forbidden fruit, who knows?
But he didn't foresee it happening in way that it occurred. Even God was tricked. His wrath, which he has never really gotten over, was not pretentious.

In answer to your Qs;
One doesn't come upon a revelation, it is the other way round.

Again, I don't talk to God. He knows me inside out. What is there to say?

I don't think anything. Its not for me to question or doubt what God reveals to me.

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by Shema

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Cool story bro.

So we became damned because we ate an apple?

We became damned, if you can put it that way, because poor Adam was seduced. But you can't put the blame on him because he , like Eve, was tricked. God blamed all three involved but that was because he knew creation in his own image had been corrupted. His grand design had been compromised before it had a chance to become.

We became damned because we ate the metaphorical "fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil". It is the knowledge of good an evil in and of itself that is damning us.

Its not the knowledge of good and evil that 'damns' us but that we have a propensity towards both . The revelation I had from God was to show me why we have this two-sided nature. The is no sin by us because both Adam and Eve were tricked. The sin is in the 'snake' therefore the bestial side of our nature is itself evil and this is what is really meant by the term The Devil. It is the Devil within, in our blood. This means there is no guilt on our part, its best to accept who we really are and sublimate our Godly side.

Originally posted by Shema
reply to post by DelayedChristmas

 

Thanks. I believe respect is a two-way street and I usually respond disrespectfully to anyone who approaches me in the same manner. Which, happily, you haven't.

You might be right that God knew Adam and Eve would eventually partake of the forbidden fruit, who knows?
But he didn't foresee it happening in way that it occurred. Even God was tricked. His wrath, which he has never really gotten over, was not pretentious.

In answer to your Qs;
One doesn't come upon a revelation, it is the other way round.

Again, I don't talk to God. He knows me inside out. What is there to say?

I don't think anything. Its not for me to question or doubt what God reveals to me.

Hm this is where we will have to agree to disagree. I don't think for an instant God can be tricked due to the reasoning that follows the nature of the big three O's: omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience. I think there was a underlying reason God allowed Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit. In my opinion, whatever happens, God allowed it happen, both good and bad. That being said, both good and bad are blessings, the bad being the one in disguise. There's a lesson involved, the questions are: Who is the lesson for and what purpose does this lesson hold?

And how would you know if this quote:

But he didn't foresee it happening in way that it occurred. Even God was tricked. His wrath, which he has never really gotten over, was not pretentious.

is of truth if you hadn't talk to or confirmed it with God? Do you know if God didn't foresee it happening in the way it occurred?

And I do understand about the thought of speaking to God being useless because He knows you inside and out, but a good Father wants to talk to his children no matter what, a la the story of the prodigal son. Sometimes the son has to go out into the wilderness before he comes back home however...