Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Serpent of Genesis is not the Dragon of Revelations
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 255 of 302 (297493)
03-23-2006 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-22-2006 10:39 PM


Justification
quote:
I'm more than comfortable discussing the plain text -- provided one can give a good justification for one to employ a plain text reading for a talking snake.
I don't feel I've read such a justification within this thread yet -- and I'll explain why I feel this way below.
This thread isn't about justifying whether one should employ a plain text reading of the A&E story.
This thread is about looking at the plain text reading.
Do you feel that other interpretations override the plain text?
This message has been edited by purpledawn, 03-23-2006 05:57 AM

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-22-2006 10:39 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 256 of 302 (297496)
03-23-2006 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-22-2006 10:39 PM


Dogmatic
quote:
Quoting Shabbat 63a is dogma because Shabbat 63a is one the few dogmatic pronouncements of the Talmud.
This was not an argument for my opinion on the snake in Genesis.
I've also pointed out that Judaism's definition concerning the plain text reading just happens to have the definition that describes how I read the Bible. That is my reason for presenting that definition to you and what the Talmud stated.
Again, this is not the focus of the thread, so let it go.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-22-2006 10:39 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 257 of 302 (297500)
03-23-2006 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-22-2006 10:39 PM


Outside Influences
quote:
Then why are you ignoring the cultures and religions which predated, surrounded, and interacted with Judaism --cultures and religions which all concluded that snakes had some mystical nature to them, whether benevolent of benign?
Yes there were many outside influences on the early Hebrew religion.
The serpent in Genesis could have easily been modeled after the Egyptian God Set, who supposedly took the serpent form of Aphophis the enemy of Re (the sun God).
If I have missed where you have presented outside influence as an argument for the snake in Genesis being Satan (enemy of God), please direct me to that post.
If snakes are believed to have mystical powers or to symbolize mystical powers, does that automatically make them Satan (enemy of God)?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-22-2006 10:39 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 258 of 302 (297502)
03-23-2006 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-22-2006 10:39 PM


The Serpent
quote:
The literal meaning of the word dragon means something to the effect of "seeing one".
I don't see that meaning in the words I see used in the Bible for dragon. You need to be more specific as to what word, which language you are talking about, etc.
quote:
What are the hebrew words for "unique one" and does it sound at all similar to any ancient words for "seeing one" found in other ancient languages?
Not sure where you get unique one and why do you ask me? Make your argument.
quote:
Do you feel my statements support your opinion as well?
Your statements on what?
No you haven't connected any dots for me, you just complained about my wanting to look at the plain text.
Make your case for Satan (enemy of God) as the snake in the Garden. If you have already, refer me back to the post.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-22-2006 10:39 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 268 of 302 (298137)
03-25-2006 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by arachnophilia
03-25-2006 3:26 PM


Misleading Quote
It is interesting the way jaywill uses a partial sentence and makes it appear that even Paul frowned upon people who understand the literary basics of the writings.
jaywill writes:
Then again the Apostle Paul warned the disciples of those who were "always learning yet never able to come to the full knowedge of the truth." (2 Tim.3:7)
When in reality, that wasn't what Paul was talking about at all.
2 Timothy 3
1 But know this: difficult times will come in the last days. 2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 unloving, irreconcilable, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, without love for what is good, 4 traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 holding to the form of religion but denying its power. Avoid these people! 6 For among them are those who worm their way into households and capture idle women burdened down with sins, led along by a variety of passions, 7 always learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.
As much as that technique is used to today, I'm surprised that people don't realize that it is not a new technique.
The comment concerning the snake on a stick in John for example gives a good visual since the audience was probably familiar with it, but doesn't change the original story.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by arachnophilia, posted 03-25-2006 3:26 PM arachnophilia has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 269 of 302 (298141)
03-25-2006 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-25-2006 8:50 PM


Make Your Case
quote:
You guys shift back and forth in your definitions, often exchanging 'literary criticism' for 'plain text reading', and then make these astounding claims that this must have been what the ancient Israelites thought.
In addition to this, you guys ignore about 1500 years of ancient religions which predate Judaism, many of which ascribed mystical significance to the role of the serpent in the world -- whether Egypt, Assyria, or Babylon for exmaple.
In addition to this, you guys ignore a wealth of information coming from the Jewish people themselves, some of which can be dated anywhere from 300 to 100 years before the birth of Christ -- and many of which ascribe evil spiritual tendencies to the serpent in the garden.
You also ignore information within the Hebrew Scriptures which indicate that the Israelites clearly felt that snakes were something akin to an arch-nemesis of humanity.
Please show or refer to where we have specifically done this and present what we have ignored and how that applies to the OP. All I see you saying is that we are ignoring various things. Show where, don't just say it.
quote:
And I just hope you guys realize that when you make the claim that the ancient Israelites beleived the snake was "just as snake", it is actually you guys who are 'projecting' your mythical literary style onto what the ancient Israelites believed about their own holy text.
Where have I actually said that?
My OP: IMO, the plain text reading does not support that the serpent of Genesis is the same as the serpent/dragon in the vision of Revelation.
and:
Just because a dragon/serpent is used to symbolize Satan in John’s vision, doesn’t make the serpent/snake in the Garden, Satan.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-25-2006 8:50 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-25-2006 10:18 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 283 of 302 (298262)
03-26-2006 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-25-2006 10:18 PM


Plain Text, Not Literal
When I ask you to refer me back to where I have made statements, I'd appreciate it if you would provide the link, so that I can refer back to the post itself.
Mr.Ex writes:
The conclusion of the OP is this:
purpledawn writes:
Sometimes a snake is just a snake.
Did you notice the very first word in that statement? The point being that every usage of the word serpent or snake in the Bible isn't necessarily referring to Satan (enemy of God).
Again, in an OP we don't present our full argument. If you feel that the serpent/dragon in John's vision makes the snake in the Garden, Satan (enemy of God), then make the connection.
I think Ringo said it correctly in Message 274: My purple friend can correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole point of the thread seems to be to avoid the extraneous externals.
I also agree with what Ringo said in Message 277. You seem to be confusing "plain text" reading with literal. Remember the definition I gave you in Message 239: The understanding of scripture in its natural, normal sense using the customary meanings of the word’s being used, literary style, historical and cultural setting, and context.
Notice that literary style is taken into account. There are different literary styles within the Bible.
Fable: 1. a fictitious story meant to teach a moral lesson: the characters are usually talking animals. 2. a myth or legend
Myth: a traditional story of unknown authorship, serving usually to explain some phenomenon of nature, the origin of man, or the customs, religious rites, etc. of a people
Legend: a story handed down for generations and popoularly believed to have a historical basis
If you've read any Jewish teachings, you will see that they tend to draw upon their legends and they call them legends.
quote:
So you actually believe the people who scribed these thoughts and carried these traditions were writing them in order to carry on myths they didn't actually beleive in?
What do you mean by believe in? Each culture has their creation story. Are they all right or do you consider them to be myths?
quote:
In other words, what we have here is a tremendous body of Jewish literature concluding the snake was either:
1) influenced supernaturally by an adversary
2) became an/the adversary
3) represented or was an agent of the adverary
4) actually was an/the adversary
5) or was outright the pre-eminent symbol of enmity
I don't think I ever stated that the serpent in Genesis was not the "villain" of the story, but that doesn't make the snake Satan (enemy of God)
My opinion is that the plain text reading does not support that the serpent of Genesis is the same as the serpent/dragon in the vision of Revelation. Just because a dragon/serpent is used to symbolize Satan in John’s vision, doesn’t make the serpent/snake in the Garden, Satan.
I'm quite aware of the symbolism that surrounds snakes and other animals. Snakes have been used to symbolize fertility, wisdom, immortality, creation, the underworld, evil, etc.
quote:
Like I said before, I'm working on a chronology to analyse serpentine mythology throughout the period in question, and then backward from there into other ancient cultures.
I look forward to reading your findings.
quote:
Message 273
purpledawn, you might think I don't like you, or that I'm picking on your idea, but that's not true. I remember when you talked about what your father went through and the loneliness he felt when he needed someone, loneliness after having dedicating his to helping so many other other people. It's simply not fair what happened to him. And I think it can really leave someone doubting things about their faith.
My assumption is that you don't like the position I'm taking, not me, especially since we are debating the position not me. You don't actually know me to dislike me.
I didn't doubt my faith then and I don't doubt it now. The situation with my father lead me to study the Bible more intensely. What I have now is a better understanding and deeper inner peace.
IOW, trying to get me to feel bad about looking at the plain text isn't going to work.
This message has been edited by purpledawn, 03-26-2006 08:48 AM

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-25-2006 10:18 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-26-2006 7:55 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 284 of 302 (298269)
03-26-2006 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by jaywill
03-26-2006 7:45 AM


quote:
I would like to put this "plain text" philosophy of yours to the test. ...
Why did God ask where Adam was?
Because they were hiding.
Not sure how this is a test of the "plain text" reading.
Since this question is off topic, please don't assume that I don't know the commentaries and lessons that have elaborate reasons as to why God asked.
God asked this question of Adam so that he would have an opportunity to confess his sin and repent before God spoke again and pronounced punishment.
It is rather an upbraiding question, in order to his conviction and humiliation: Where art thou? Not, In what place? but, In what condition?
ETC
Commentaries and lessons aren't necessarily based on the plain sense reading of the text.
Please don't continue with this line of questioning. We're getting close to the limit of this thread and your question doesn't deal with the topic.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by jaywill, posted 03-26-2006 7:45 AM jaywill has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 292 of 302 (298422)
03-26-2006 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
03-26-2006 7:55 PM


Providing References
quote:
I seem to recall asking you to provide references to your thoughts in another thread we were engaged in a while back. Actually, I asked you a couple times to provide a link so I could understand your position if I recall correctly -- and yet you never provided a direct link to any of your thoughts.
Please tell me you understand the difference between providing links to pertinent posts within the same thread concerning the topic and providing links to explain my personal view of the Bible which covered various threads and was off topic.
If you were paying attention in this thread, you should have your answer now as to what I mean by understanding the reality of the Bible.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-26-2006 7:55 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 293 of 302 (298437)
03-26-2006 9:01 PM


EOT in 7 Posts
Well this thread is drawing to a close. Good time to start winding down.
Unfortunately most of this thread was wasted complaining about looking at the plain text and no real discussion took place concerning the plain text or plain sense reading of serpent in the Genesis story.
In Message 170 I summarized the closest comments I've had concerning the plain text reading from the opposition. If I've missed any, please provide a link.
In Genesis the serpent is a beast of the field created by God and cursed by God. Even though presented as the villain of the story, the text doesn't support that the snake is Satan (enemy of God).

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by arachnophilia, posted 03-26-2006 11:08 PM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 295 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 03-26-2006 11:19 PM purpledawn has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024