Why was Satan in the Garden of Eden?

[RottieGrrrl]

I am trying to do some basic bible study here, and I don't know if this question has been answered before, but can somebody give me an idea of WHY the devil was in the garden of Eden in the first place? And if anyone is on a roll here, why did he take on the form of a snake, and then why would God curse the serpent? And if the serpent didn't crawl on his belly before he was cursed, what the hell (scuse the pun) was he doing before? walking on 4 legs? Seriously, I know this is not all answered in the Word, but does anyone have any ideas?

[waysider]

There are common themes that run through all genres of mythology, such as resurrection, afterlife, nemeses, etc. Seth recently started a thread related to this subject in the open forum. (HERE) Perhaps the answer lies in another religion's version of the event. Of course, one must "get passed" the idea of inerrancy when contemplating such materials.

[RottieGrrrl]

With all due respect, I want the Word's answer to this, and people who have studied the Word of God. I am a believer in the Lord Jesus, and would like an answer relating to Genesis. Just to make myself clear

Wordwolf?I did not want to call your name, but him or anybody who has a knowledge and belief in the true Word of God please? :)/>/>

Edited May 25, 2013 by RottieGrrrl

[waysider]

THIS author has penned several works related to the subject, though I haven't personally read any of them.

[WordWolf]

Give me 12 hours-I'm on the run this moment.

[RottieGrrrl]

Give me 12 hours-I'm on the run this moment.

LOL! I KNEW I could count on the WOLF! :)/>

Edited May 25, 2013 by RottieGrrrl

[Human without the bean]

WHY the devil was in the garden of Eden in the first place? anyone have any ideas?

I think I can help here with part of your question. The devil was more subtle than any beast that God made. Gen. 3.1

His nature was slippery, that of a snake.

The devil was in the garden laying in wait for any attempt to win his lordship over Adam and Eve. Satan was there to disguise himself from showing his true nature and to use his treachery and trick Adam and Eve into betraying God.

When he succeeded, man lost his place in the garden. Satan became the head of this world, 2 Corin. 4:4 the title man held before the fall.

We know the nature of the devil is to steal, kill, and destroy. Those are not very pleasant attributes are they? A thief, a murderer, and a destroyer.

[WordWolf]

I won't disagree with anything H w/o B just said,

but I think a different question was meant,

so I'll try to cover as much ground as I can as briefly as I can.

Ok, what are the questions?

"1. can somebody give me an idea of WHY the devil was in the garden of Eden in the first place?

2) why did he take on the form of a snake?

3) why would God curse the serpent?

if the serpent didn't crawl on his belly before he was cursed, what the hell (scuse the pun) was he doing before? walking on 4 legs?"

Ok, I can answer 2-4 together.

This is all IMHO, as I understand it.

Zephaniah 3:3

Her princes within her are roaring lions, Her judges are wolves at evening; They leave nothing for the morning.

(Personally, I think "wolves" rather than "jackals" is poor translating on behalf of lazy

Eurocentric translators who never wondered how wolves ended up in deserts and so on,

but that's drifting off-topic.)

Here we see that people can be addressed, metaphorically, as animals whose supposed

attributes match those of the people.

To this day, we might call an untrustworthy person a "snake-in-the-grass" or a "sidewinder"

or the like.

The former Lucifer, the former lightbearer, the former bright and morning star,

was treacherous and sneaky, traits attributed to serpents.

If someone lies a lot, I might consider calling him "Rug."

Now, The Serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made.

He wasn't LITERALLY a beast of the field, LITERALLY a limbless animal.

Genesis 3:13c"

“The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

Genesis 3:14 The Lord God said to The Serpent,

“Because you have done this,

Cursed are you more than all cattle,

And more than every beast of the field;

On your belly you will go,

And dust you will eat

All the days of your life;"

That wasn't a literal animal God was referring to- but a sneaky, conniving being.

satan, the accuser, was cursed more than any cattle or beast of the field,

and-although he vaunted himself up as the greatest and highest,

he was humbled and made low.

That had nothing to do, in and of itself, with any actual animal.

That's what was said to "The Serpent", aka satan, etc.

Why does it all sound like an actual serpent?

God needed to explain it to people in ways people could understand.

Jesus taught with parables mentioning lillies, grass, birds, and so on-

things people were familiar with, imagery they could relate to.

So, the accuser was likened TO a serpent, a snake-in-the-grass,

and his punishments were likewise compared to the activities

and reputations of a LITERAL snake in the grass.

So, that's what the deal is with "serpent"-it's an extended metaphor.

I'm not a LITERAL wolf, either. :)

I'll get back to you on the first question within a few hours.

[WordWolf]

James 1:12-14

12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.

===============================

What was satan doing in the Garden?

That question may mean a few things-I will try to touch on a few of them.

Again, all of this is AFAIK, IMHO.

The being known as satan was originally the right-hand "man" of The Creator.

Full of pride and conceit in his own (created) greatness,

he decided he should be exalted about all other "angels" and should get

worship that was going to his Creator.

So, he convinced 1/3 of the "angels" to rebel, and led a ridiculous rebellion

in heaven. His forces lost to those of Michael, and were cast down to

THE EARTH.

After this come the "days of creation" of Genesis 1.

(Some believe they were needed as a result of the war in heaven.

Myself, I think the evidence shows that something struck the earth and

destroyed the ecosystem, triggering a major extinction event and

requiring the "days of creation" of Genesis 1.)

Nothing indicates this has changed when Man arrives, "Adam" and "Eve."

Adam was given dominion over the Earth- in effect, making Adam

"god of Earth" subordinate to God Almighty.

Physically, satan arrived to Earth and never left it.

So, that's the answer to how satan got to Earth.

As to what he was doing "in the garden of Eden",

that's a different matter.

satan knew that he thought he deserved worship and to be God.

Adam had a position somewhat like a sample of what satan wanted.

So, satan set out to steal Adam's office which he felt was

rightfully his.

He succeeded. He's later referred to as "god of this world",

and has authority over the kingdoms of the world, and their

glory.

When Adam sinned, he lost his connection to God, AND he lost

his Office and title. Afterwards, we know satan has it, and

there is nothing to indicate anyone else had it between that.

The logical conclusion is to at least speculate if Adam lost

it and satan got it at the same moment.

So, that's the answer to "why did satan want to be there?"

Was there something else?

I've given some thought to satan's faulty logic chains

in the past,

[Steve Lortz]

I have to defer to WordWolf's findings regarding the theological significance of the serpent in the garden. I certainly haven't thought them through to the extent he has, but I came across some interesting supplementary considerations in a book called The Seven Pillars of Creation by William P. Brown. In the book, Brown examines seven different accounts of creation given in the Old Testament, two accounts in Genesis 1-3, and the accounts in Job 38-41, Psalm 104, Proverbs 8:22-31 and sections from Ecclesiates and Isaiah 40-50. All of them have major differences from each other.

At one level of interpretation, the differences in the accounts could be looked at as contradictions, but at another, they can be regarded as alternate viewpoints that give us a multi-dimensional understanding. One thing you realize when you look at all seven accounts together is that God created creation because HE LOVES WHAT HE CREATED! He created Leviathan TO PLAY WITH!

One thing I had to come to grips with while reading The Seven Pillars of Creation was the truth that NO part of the Bible was EVER written in a vacuum. How did these particular stories come into the collection? I think they go back to the days of Abraham, when this particular group of people was wandering around with a lot of time to kill. They told the stories they had learned in Mesopotamia before they set out. It was ALL oral for centuries. The Israelites picked up stories from the people around them, in Egypt and later in Canaan. As the Israelites told these stories, they tweaked them to put their own spins on them. When we view the Bible as being God-breathed, we have to realize that His breathing was as much... or even MORE... in these tweakings than in the later writing. In the religions that the Israelites came out of, there were serpents who guarded trees of knowledge. The knowledge was highly treasured and the serpents were revered guardians. People worshiped the serpents in order to get the knowledge. The Israelite religion turned becoming as smart as a god (in order to manipulate the god) from being the wonderful thing it was in the religions around them into the original sin!

Love,

Steve

Edited May 26, 2013 by Steve Lortz

[waysider]

Why was he in the garden?

Maybe he was waiting for a bus. All that slithering can make a fella tired.

[RottieGrrrl]

You guys, this is freaking FASCINATING. I'm going to take awhile here getting my Word and digesting this. Thanks for the homework for today! Love it! :)

[RottieGrrrl]

You guys, this is freaking FASCINATING. I'm going to take awhile here getting my Word and digesting this. Thanks for the homework for today! Love it! :)/>

Just an aside here, but can you imagine what a kick-foot warrior Michael must be? I'd hate to be on the bad side of him! ;)

kick foot? lol. I did not type that, lol.

[RottieGrrrl]

WW I have to say, you are quoting parts of the OT I didn't even know existed. MAKING THIS REAL HOMEWORK FOR ME! lol. :)

[RottieGrrrl]

This stuff is a LOT to digest. So I'm taking my time here....I'm reading everybody's stuff.

[RottieGrrrl]

good grief Steve Lortz, I never knew about Leviathan the sea monster! Thanks!

Waysider, thanks for the link, looks interesting! Human without bean: (what bean are you without?lol) thanks for the contrib. :)/>

Edited May 26, 2013 by RottieGrrrl

[RottieGrrrl]

Yeah I do have another question, but I don't want to bleed you guys to death because of my pea-brain. So I guess I'll leave it be for now.....

[WordWolf]

Yeah I do have another question, but I don't want to bleed you guys to death because of my pea-brain. So I guess I'll leave it be for now.....

Feel free to fire away.

BTW,

I'm well aware that I expounded at length without providing the verses.

I did that because it would have taken a few pages and significant exposition

all the way through. IMHO, satan's history is not meant to be a line of

inquiry for us, so it's not that easy to track. So, I'd need to get into,

a bit, why certain verses are read as references to him when they don't

have any of his names all over them.

Personally,

I think it's a shame that the Bible was not written like a 21st century

textbook. True, it would have been MUCH less useful for people from the

previous millenia, but for me here and now, it would be a LOT easier

to dig out the more obscure details.

;)

[RottieGrrrl]

Feel free to fire away.

BTW,

I'm well aware that I expounded at length without providing the verses.

I did that because it would have taken a few pages and significant exposition

all the way through. IMHO, satan's history is not meant to be a line of

inquiry for us, so it's not that easy to track. So, I'd need to get into,

a bit, why certain verses are read as references to him when they don't

have any of his names all over them.

Personally,

I think it's a shame that the Bible was not written like a 21st century

textbook. True, it would have been MUCH less useful for people from the

previous millenia, but for me here and now, it would be a LOT easier

to dig out the more obscure details.

;)/>

I am going to fire away, just got back on the computer after a week of flood watch here, anyway, I will start the PT with you. and I AGREE about the 21st century stuff. I try to read easier versions, but I still get confused about certain things., sigh, okay, on to the PT :)

[RottieGrrrl]

For some reason I thought I was starting a private conversation with WW, and either I don't know what I'm doing, or ....I don't know what I'm doing. BUT. here is my BIG question that I have a problem with. Why would God allow the devil to be in the Garden to tempt Adam and Eve anyway? I heard one TV preacher say he believes that the serpent was really supposed to be put there by God as an angel to help Adam and Eve, and instead turned on God and took advantage of them. Without getting off on a tangent about that teaching, it does NOT make sense to me that God would allow a sneaky evil being to tempt them. What if satan wasn't there? Would they have not stood at least a better chance? The TV preacher said that would be like throwing your child onto the highway to play. But even though I think this guy is OFF on this subject, I kind of see his point. And okay, if anyone has the patience with my crazy questions. What would happen if Eve had eaten the apple but not Adam. Would we still be okay? Sheesh. I know. I guess she would have died but he wouldn't have. I don't know. But you know, these are honest questions I have. Anyone? Take your time cause I know poeple have lives (unlike me) but I really would appreciate any input. :)

[waysider]

I think if you try to analyze every little detail, as if it was all literal, you miss the essence of the message ..... Man's endless struggle to choose between good and evil......can't see the forest for the trees sort of thing, ya know?

edit: This is why I think, if one hopes to understand the larger scope of the message, one needs to accept that there ARE contradictions, things that don't always fit, that mathematical precision and scientific accuracy are just a catchy little phrase that has no basis in reality.

Edited June 2, 2013 by waysider

[WordWolf]

Something may be up with my account settings I can't find,

but I'll get back to this when I can.

[RottieGrrrl]

Got your email WW, thanks! Waysider I know, but seeing as the entire fall of mankind was because of this, It's a burning question I have in my heart. I know that not every question we have is going to be answered to our satisfaction, but I'd like to have at least a clue on certain things. :)/>

Got your email WW, thanks! Waysider I know, but seeing as the entire fall of mankind was because of this, It's a burning question I have in my heart. I know that not every question we have is going to be answered to our satisfaction, but I'd like to have at least a clue on certain things. :)/>/> Besides, it's interesting to see what different perspectives there are out there.

And I still don't even know how to edit properly either it seems.

Edited June 3, 2013 by RottieGrrrl

[waysider]

How can I state this more clearly? It's a myth. And, it's not unique to Christianity. It appears in belief systems from all over the globe, throughout recorded history. That, in itself, ought to tell us that the lesson to be gleaned from it is vitally important to man understanding his own nature. Until we can move beyond the idea that it's a documentation of a historical event, our understanding of its meaning will be severely restricted. Therefore, it might be beneficial to see how it plays out in the Greek writings, the writings of Native American peoples and so forth.

[WordWolf]

How can I say this more clearly?

We KNOW you think it's a myth.

We disagree.

We're aware that it can be framed so as to resemble myths to a remarkable degree.

If I was bored enough, I could do that with a lot of events from the news from

different time-frames.

You already called it "MYTHOLOGY."

Some of us disagree.

The original poster is asking questions that go in completely the opposite

direction than you want to go. Even if you're convinced she's completely

wrong, provincial, and under-educated, can't you accept that this is her

right? She can choose to pursue questions you consider silly, and avenues

of inquiry you think don't even exist.

She's not passing judgement on you for discarding what she considers to be

deeper truths than the sociological theories of the day can offer.

Can you return the favor? And if not, can you at least leave her alone

about it and just judge her without hitting 'reply'?

It's not like she's pushing vpw worship or anything....