Who was the Serpent in the Garden?

Here's a thought -- the snake is the externalized concept of temptation and the story introduces the idea that man, in his rawest form truly was a tabula rasa and had no particular inclination to break rules -- that this urge had to be introduced from the outside. This absolves man on some level because it lays the blame on some outside agent, at least initially. Then, the urge becomes internalized through the eating so subsequent people have this same desire built in. The moral of the story is "recognize that you now have this wish to break rules, but look at the consequences last time..."

Or, maybe the story is saying that man cannot exist in his pristine state and will, inevitably, fall victim to any environmental temptation. The snake then represents a very natural source for desire, earthly, not divine.

Interesting. I've always seen this story as an attempt to shift blame away from God and onto us, but you're right -- it also tries to shift blame away from us and onto the "outside agent" of the snake. At least, partial blame.

It's nothing more than an interesting piece of fiction people buy into for one singular reason: Fear.

Thanks for answering.

That's not a bad takeaway. Do you mean the snake was supposed to represent sexual temptation only?

So you don't think the Serpent was the devil at all? Actually, do you even believe in the devil? I can't remember you ever saying.

Interesting. I've always seen this story as an attempt to shift blame away from God and onto us, but you're right -- it also tries to shift blame away from us and onto the "outside agent" of the snake. At least, partial blame.

Where does the chain of blame end? What is the source?

It's not God's fault, it's man's fault.

It's not man's fault, it's Eve's fault.

It's not Eve's fault, it's the Serpent's fault.

It's like we had such a hard time explaining where Badness comes from that we set up this chain of regression that ended up at "There was this snake and he was just bad. He was bad from the beginning."

You're not conceptualizing this enough

I don't see the story about evil as such; it's about why life sucks - ie why we have to work and why child-bearing hurts.  The writers weren't concerned with abstracts like good and evil so as much as practical matters of obedience and disobedience.   

The idea that God had all these infinite and omni- powers and was 'perfect' came later.  Gods were powerful, but not unlimited.  If you flattered and obeyed your god he looked after your your tribe, if you didn't you'd be punished with such things as famine or defeat in war.  It was a simple arrangement with no need for complex moral theory!

Can someone ban that dude? He's on some drugs or something. Reading his posts gives me a headache.

You can't say a story isn't about good and bad if the point is to address "If God good, why life bad?"

If Christianity is true, i'm 100% confident that i'm Lucifer.

It was not an age of sophisticated literary criticism.  But perhaps they, like us, couldn't resist wondering about the world and the lights in the sky.  If an ordinary Hebrew was to ask about such things their priests had to have an answer.  Their power and status depended on their claim of such knowledge.

If people in the C21st can take Genesis literally we can be sure people 3000 years ago did.   A tale of gods and magic would not seem fantastic or unlikely then;  it would not be offered or received as an allegory or metaphor but as unvarnished truth.  

Here's a thought -- the snake is the externalized concept of temptation and the story introduces the idea that man, in his rawest form truly was a tabula rasa and had no particular inclination to break rules -- that this urge had to be introduced from the outside. This absolves man on some level because it lays the blame on some outside agent, at least initially. Then, the urge becomes internalized through the eating so subsequent people have this same desire built in. The moral of the story is "recognize that you now have this wish to break rules, but look at the consequences last time..."

Or, maybe the story is saying that man cannot exist in his pristine state and will, inevitably, fall victim to any environmental temptation. The snake then represents a very natural source for desire, earthly, not divine.