Genesis 3:15: does "seed of woman" = Jesus?

[gnostic]

In another thread of mine - ha‘almah harah: "a young woman is pregnant" - sincerly brought up Genesis 3:15, in which he believe the "seed of woman" is Jesus.

Rather than further sidetrack this already sidetracked-thread, I thought we can debate about the "seed" in a new thread.

For matter of convenience, I had quoted the whole thing that God said to the serpent, which is the punishment or curse upon the serpent; so Genesis 14-15. Actually, below are quotes, from different translations - KJV and NJPS (New Jewish Publication Society, 1985 translation). In red and bold, are the passage I would like to focus on, which is the "seed" (KJV) or "offspring" (NJPS).

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

14 Then the LORD God said to the serpent,"Because you did this,
More cursed shall you be
Than all cattle
And all the wild beasts:
On your belly shall you crawl
And dirt shall you eat
All the days of your life.

15 I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your offspring and hers;
They shall strike at your head,
And you shall strike at their heel."

In English, whether one would use "seed" or "offspring" can be either singular or plural noun for either child or children.

As to, Hebrew, I am not too sure. Hopefully someone with Hebrew (language) background can provide the Hebrew words for either "offspring" or "seed" (or their transliteration).

When no specific person are referred to, then the word "seed" or "offspring", so the word would have plural or generic intention or context.

The only other reference to "seed" in the Adam and Eve story is found in KJV translation of Genesis 4:25, after Cain was banished for murdering his brother Abel. When Seth was born, Eve said this:

25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

In NJPS translation used "another offspring", while NRSV used "another child", for Genesis 4:25.

Here, we know with certainty that the "another seed" is attached to a specific person (in this case, Seth), so logically and contextually, the word "seed" would be a singular noun.

Anyway, the contrasting views are these:

Sincerly, and I would guess, some if not all Christians, believed that the "seed of woman" mentioned or alluded in Genesis 3:15, referred to Jesus, being the "seed", and "Mary" being the "woman".

On the other hand, this is simply the story of Adam and Eve, and the "seed of woman" has nothing to do with Jesus and Mary. In another word, the "seed of woman" are the children and descendants of Eve - the supposed mother of mankind.

I don't think the "seed" refer to any specific individual, let alone the messiah or Jesus.

Why do some (Christians) believe this verse - Genesis 3:15 - to be a messianic prophecy about Jesus?
Is there validity of "seed of woman" being referred to Jesus?​

 

[Pegg]

In English, whether one would use "seed" or "offspring" can be either singular or plural noun for either child or children.

As to, Hebrew, I am not too sure. Hopefully someone with Hebrew (language) background can provide the Hebrew words for either "offspring" or "seed" (or their transliteration).... Why do some (Christians) believe this verse - Genesis 3:15 - to be a messianic prophecy about Jesus?
Is there validity of "seed of woman" being referred to Jesus?

the words for 'seed'/'offspring' are:
hebrew; ze′raʽ
Greek; sper′ma

'Son's' in hebrew is the plural word ba·nim′, or singular ben. And this is what proves that Genesis is pointing to 'one' individual as the 'seed' by the fact that it uses the word Ze'ra and not banim.
Paul explains why this is the case.
He pointed out that Abraham’s seed was in reference to one person
“Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. It [or, He] says, not: ‘And to seeds [Gr., sper′ma·sin],’ as in the case of many such, but as in the case of one: ‘And to your seed [Gr., sper′ma·ti′],’ who is Christ.”—Ga 3:16

You can think of it this way, the expression “my offspring” could refer to one or to many of your children. But if you use the word “he” in reference to that offspring, then you are implying that a 'single' child or descendant was meant.
Also, consider that the promise to Abraham that all the families of the earth would bless themselves in his “seed” could not have included all of Abraham’s offspring because Ishmael was not included as part of Abrahams blessing. Nor were any of his sons by Keturah. So obviously 'seed' did not include 'every' offspring in the case of Abraham.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Tom Lehr wrote a song titled "Smut" which contained the lines ...

All books can be indecent books
Though recent books are bolder
For filth, I'm glad to say, is in
The mind of the beholder
When correctly viewed
Everything is lewd
I could tell you things about Peter Pan
And the Wizard of Oz, there's a dirty old man​

Much the same can be said about the question posed in this and similar 'prophesy' threads: when 'correctly viewed', everything becomes Jesus. It is a self-serving, intellectually bankrupt, and disgusting abuse of Jewish scripture.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

'Son's' in hebrew is the plural word ba·nim′, or singular ben. And this is what proves that Genesis is pointing to 'one' individual as the 'seed' by the fact that it uses the word Ze'ra and not banim.

Proves? This is laughable.

 

[Sleeppy]

Proves? This is laughable.

She already made her point(s). Where's yours?

 

[Green Kepi]

Someone help me on this question...please. Genesis 3:15 - "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and hers..." If this is speaking of Satan; does this imply that he has children? (Remember...He is talking to the serpent...)

 

[Brickjectivity]

gnostic, there is a rich and confusing soup of information about it on the internet. I suggest that you study the origins of the Menorah, particularly its use in ancient paintings and the origin of the term 'Sacrum'. Here's an idea I got from a book that I found somewhere, which currently I cannot locate.

The sacrum is the part of any living thing that reproduces, like a seed. It has always been a mystery why the person dies but their seed lives on, and people have always wondered where the first seeds came from. All things die, and all living things have a sacrum -- the magical immortal part themselves. Several symbols came into common use to represent this, one being the serpent eating its own tail. Another was a particular kind of tree with peculiar properties (can't remember the species) but I suspect this has something to do with Menorahs, the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman etc. I think of the 'Seed' in Genesis as representing a question instead of a solid item representing an answer.

The 'Seed' of the serpent or woman or fruit or sacrum of any given species, then, could refer to the big Questions: "Where does such & such come from? Whats it for? Why are we here?" The seed of the woman could refer to "Where do all the living come from?" Instead of a statement you could think of it as more of a question in images. Putting them all together you could get a much more complex question in images like "How did we get here, why is there good and why is there evil?" There could be other explanations, but Genesis focuses upon the seed of the serpent, the seed of the woman, the fruit of the two trees and so forth. Perhaps putting all the questions together in images is a way of answering Big questions.

 

[Pegg]

Proves? This is laughable.

No really. If the blessing to all nations was to come through the entire nation of Israel, then why not use the word banim (sons)?

 

[Pegg]

Someone help me on this question...please. Genesis 3:15 - "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and hers..." If this is speaking of Satan; does this imply that he has children? (Remember...He is talking to the serpent...)

note Jesus words to the men who were seeking to kill him:

John 8:44*YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father.

the emnity between the serpents seed and the seed of the woman is being expressed here. Those who oppose God are the seed of the serpent, and those who submit to God are the seed of the 'woman' which is Gods heavenly kingdom or rulership.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Do you even think it is reasonable and realistic that God talks to a Serpent or Even Satan?
I mean is it even realistic to assume that Satan exists in a literal sense as a person?

I think we should first come to the point if these stories are symbolic or literal at first then move forward to discuss the details of the words such as seed or seeds etc etc.

 

[Pegg]

Do you even think it is reasonable and realistic that God talks to a Serpent or Even Satan?
I mean is it even realistic to assume that Satan exists in a literal sense as a person?

I think we should first come to the point if these stories are symbolic or literal at first then move forward to discuss the details of the words such as seed or seeds etc etc.

the bible does not present Satan as an 'idea'...or as something symbolic. It presents him as a real person.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

note Jesus words to the men who were seeking to kill him:

John 8:44*YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father.

the emnity between the serpents seed and the seed of the woman is being expressed here. Those who oppose God are the seed of the serpent, and those who submit to God are the seed of the 'woman' which is Gods heavenly kingdom or rulership.

The fact is their biological fathers were human not someone imaginary called Satan. Being childeren of Satan is a metaphoric expression.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

the bible does not present Satan as an 'idea'...or as something symbolic. It presents him as a real person.

Yes. It present satan as a person but it doesn't mean it is not symbolic. In some part of Hebrew scriptures it presents 'Stars' as persons. But does it mean stars are persons?

 

[Green Kepi]

note Jesus words to the men who were seeking to kill him:

John 8:44*YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father.

the emnity between the serpents seed and the seed of the woman is being expressed here. Those who oppose God are the seed of the serpent, and those who submit to God are the seed of the 'woman' which is Gods heavenly kingdom or rulership.

Hey...thanks, Pegg! Very seldom do I agree with any of your writing; however, I'd never thought of this...thanks! You are right on...

 

[Brickjectivity]

he bible does not present Satan as an 'idea'...or as something symbolic. It presents him as a real person.

It also presents Sin as a real person in Genesis 4:7. "Sin crouches at your door and desires to have you, but you must master him/it." This little usage in Genesis 4 is quite telling about how Satan the thing can be thought of as a being yet not be a being. There's nothing wrong with saying Satan isn't a person. At the same time the word 'Satan' almost always refers to a person, such as Peter when Jesus calls him Satan (Matthew 16:23, Mark 8:33). At one point the LORD is called Satan (by comparing I Chronicles 21:1 & 2 Samuel 24:1) which demonstrates that the term is very flexible.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No really. If the blessing to all nations was to come through the entire nation of Israel, then why not use the word banim (sons)?

Perhaps because in the Biblical Hebrew of the time serpents did not have sons and daughters.

Does it not strike you as at all odd that the term 'offspring' is found in the JPS and in the NRSV alike? Even NICOT warns:

In the vast majority of cases where zera' (lit., "seed") refers to an individual child, it refers to an immediate offspring rather than a distant descendant. ... This observation alone should caution us about seeing too quickly a clear-cut reference here to some remote individual.

Similarly, one shold not force an interpretation on her offspring that the expression cannot bear. The LXX translates HEB. zar'ah (lit., "her seed") as spermatos autos (lit., "her seed"), and the Vulg. as semen illius (also lit., "her seed"), but to read the LXX as "her sperm" and the Vulg. as "her semen" (an oxymoron if there ever was one!) in order to see a hint here of the virgin birth of this seed (the absence of the sperm supplying father) is farfetched indeed. If for no other reason, Gen. 4:25 would invalidate that proposal, for here Eve says that God has given her "another seed," and certainly Seth was not born of a virgin.

Nevertheless, in a number of passages Heb. zera' is a collective referring to distant offspring or a large group of descendants (Gen. 9:9; 12:7; 13:16; 15:5,13,18; 16:10; 17:7-10, 12; 21:12; 22:17-18). Although most modern translations us a plural for these references - "descendants" - the Hebrew itself never uses the plural. A translation like "posterity, offspring" captures the collective sense of zera' more accurately. ...

We may want to be cautious about calling this verse a messianic prophecy. ...

[pp. 198-199]

Straining to suck theological confirmation from someone else's scripture is a bit like seeing Jesus in a piece of toast.

 

[Pegg]

The fact is their biological fathers were human not someone imaginary called Satan. Being childeren of Satan is a metaphoric expression.

yes thats true. But that doesnt mean that satan is an 'imaginary' being.

The bible also calls God our father. Does that mean that he is imaginary as well?

 

[Pegg]

Hey...thanks, Pegg! Very seldom do I agree with any of your writing; however, I'd never thought of this...thanks! You are right on...

yw,

 

[CMike]

Someone help me on this question...please. Genesis 3:15 - "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and hers..." If this is speaking of Satan; does this imply that he has children? (Remember...He is talking to the serpent...)

It doesn't need to imply anything.

It states what it means.

G-D will place enmity between women and snakes.

What is unclear hear?

 

[CMike]

It also presents Sin as a real person in Genesis 4:7. "Sin crouches at your door and desires to have you, but you must master him/it." This little usage in Genesis 4 is quite telling about how Satan the thing can be thought of as a being yet not be a being. There's nothing wrong with saying Satan isn't a person. At the same time the word 'Satan' almost always refers to a person, such as Peter when Jesus calls him Satan (Matthew 16:23, Mark 8:33). At one point the LORD is called Satan (by comparing I Chronicles 21:1 & 2 Samuel 24:1) which demonstrates that the term is very flexible.

It is not saying that "sin is a person.

You can exchange the word sin for love, hate, misery, etc.

It doesn't mean that they are people.