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

[Brickjectivity]

Thanks CMike. I don't literally mean it that way. It presents sin as a person as in a personification of sin, at least that is how it seems.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

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?

No, you are right about that. What I intended to say is Satan is an imaginary in a sense that people imagine he is a person. But not in a sense that there is no such a force as Satan.

In Scriptures it is said Satan causes us to do sins, but we see that it says, the flesh forces us to do sin. So that force of selfishness from the flash symbolically expressed as a Person (Satan)

These verses make this clear:

Galatians - 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,



Then it is obvious that it is the natural desires of the flesh that cause us to do evil things, not the influence of an external person as some may imagine.

 

[Pegg]

No, you are right about that. What I intended to say is Satan is an imaginary in a sense that people imagine he is a person. But not in a sense that there is no such a force as Satan.

In Scriptures it is said Satan causes us to do sins, but we see that it says, the flesh forces us to do sin. So that force of selfishness from the flash symbolically expressed as a Person (Satan)

These verses make this clear:

Galatians - 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,



Then it is obvious that it is the natural desires of the flesh that cause us to do evil things, not the influence of an external person as some may imagine.

the christian perspective is quite different to this.

Yes we have fleshly desires, but if you notice that in Galations, it is 'wrong' desires/fleshly traits that paul is highlighting. Adultery is the act of wrongful sexual intercourse with someone other then your wife or husband. Fornication is illicit sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage & outside what is natural (ie, beastiality).

But there are desires of the flesh which are not bad in themselves. The desire for food is a natural normal and good physical response. The desire for sexual relations is also a natural normal desire which is good for reproduction. So if we were to say that all fleshly desires are a form of 'satan' (which makes little sense to me btw) its as if we are saying the way God created us is very bad.

However, if we accept that Satan the devil is a real person as the bible tells us, then our fleshly desires are not all bad or wrong. Some of them are very good and indeed needed for life to exist. The problem is that these good desires can become wrong desires when we take them out of their proper context.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

the christian perspective is quite different to this.

Yes we have fleshly desires, but if you notice that in Galations, it is 'wrong' desires/fleshly traits that paul is highlighting. Adultery is the act of wrongful sexual intercourse with someone other then your wife or husband. Fornication is illicit sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage & outside what is natural (ie, beastiality).

But there are desires of the flesh which are not bad in themselves. The desire for food is a natural normal and good physical response. The desire for sexual relations is also a natural normal desire which is good for reproduction. So if we were to say that all fleshly desires are a form of 'satan' (which makes little sense to me btw) its as if we are saying the way God created us is very bad.

What Bible teaches is that All Sins come from the Flash, as the quote said. This is why Bible uses the Term 'Natural Body' versus 'Spiritual Body'
But that does not mean every desire from Flash is sin.
But if that desire 'transgresses' the boundaries that are set by God, then it is sin.
So for example sex is not sin as long as it within the boundary of marriage. But when that lust from the Flash, can take control and cause adultery then it is Sin.

However, when our Spirit is Trained by the Word of God, it can control the desires of flash as to not transgress the boundaries set by God, hence the term 'Spiritual Body'

So, there is nothing as an external person here working on us!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This is why Bible uses the Term 'Natural Body' versus 'Spiritual Body'

Ignorant rubbish.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

However, if we accept that Satan the devil is a real person as the bible tells us, ...

Perhaps you would like to pursue/defend this claim in a different thread.

 

[gnostic]

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.

It is not just zera, but zerah, which I believed to be translated as "her seed" or "her offspring".

Genesis 3:14-15 is quite specific, in which God spoke directly to the serpent of losing its feet and forced to crawl (3:14), and then enmity between serpent and woman, and between the respective "seed" or "offspring" (3:15).

There are no other women there, before God in the Garden of Eden, other than the one would be named "Eve", a little later in 3:20:

The man named his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.

20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

The woman - who would be named Eve - was called woman throughout Genesis 2 & 3. So woman here in Genesis 3:15 cannot be anyone other than Eve.

So when God spoke to the serpent, there is a specific "woman" in mind, so it is certainly not Mary. But it doesn't specify who is or who are the seed. But since the woman standing before God was Eve, then it can be easily implied that the "seed" would be Eve's children.

So Eve gave birth to 3 sons, who were named Cain, Abel and Seth, but they (Adam and Eve) obviously had other children who were never named - sons and daughters, as can be seen in Genesis 5:4.

And I have already quoted Genesis 4:25, when Eve named Seth:

25 Adam knew his wife again, and she bore him a son and named him Seth, meaning "God had produced me with another offspring in place of Abel."

Or in KJV, which used "seed" instead of offspring:

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[/COLOR] instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Also the fact that god is talking directly at the serpent, about "thy seed" (serpent's) and "her seed", and not at the woman (yet), would indicate that this curse of enmity between snakes and humans, has nothing to do with any messiah.

If it was really a prophecy about the messiah, should god be talking about the "seed" to the woman-Eve (or even to Adam), instead of to the serpent.

Often when a divine prophecy, sign, omen, blessing, covenant, curse or punishment is given, either by a prophet, angel or god himself, they are normally addressed to a human (either individually or to group of people) and not to an animal.

If Genesis 3:15 was truly a sign about the messiah, then the sign should have been given to Adam or Eve.

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.

You are making assumption that the serpent is Satan, when nothing in Genesis, or any book that have been attributed to Moses, say anything about "Satan" or the "Devil" or whatever you want to call him.

And beside all, Pegg, just because you can quote some vague verses from the NT books, doesn't mean that your Satan-Devil has anything to do with the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Can Satan possibly have children, offspring or "seed"?

 

[CG Didymus]

For matter of convenience, I had quoted the whole thing that God said to the serpent,
Genesis 3:14-15, KJV
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:


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?

Doesn't Paul or someone talk about this verse in one the epistles? But besides that, you've got two important Christian things going on here. Not only do they claim the seed is Jesus but the serpent is the devil/Satan. I've never heard a good explanation how Satan could be the one that is cursed above all cattle and upon his belly he will go and dust shall he eat? And, was there even a Jewish concept of Satan when the Torah was given?

 

[CG Didymus]

the christian perspective is quite different to this.

Yes we have fleshly desires, but if you notice that in Galations, it is 'wrong' desires/fleshly traits that paul is highlighting. Adultery is the act of wrongful sexual intercourse with someone other then your wife or husband. Fornication is illicit sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage & outside what is natural (ie, beastiality).

But there are desires of the flesh which are not bad in themselves. The desire for food is a natural normal and good physical response. The desire for sexual relations is also a natural normal desire which is good for reproduction. So if we were to say that all fleshly desires are a form of 'satan' (which makes little sense to me btw) its as if we are saying the way God created us is very bad...

It's as if God created us very bad? Yes, it seems that way. The Christian God, or Jesus, created us very bad. If the Christians are right, then God gave us rules, by way of his chosen people, that he knew were impossible to follow. And those of us that don't believe in the Christian God are so dumb that we spend our few years on Earth "enjoying" the bad desires of the flesh and thus sending our eternal souls to hell fire? What did our souls ever do? It was our flawed mind and body that was too stupid to listen to the "truth."

 

[outhouse]

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).





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:



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?
​

Believe it or not, the authors of the gospels assumed similar passages like these were in relationship to Jesus. So it is a possibility.

They read Jesus into much of the OT and used that into their scripture.


People have been doing this for thousands of years since the beginning.



Not saying its credible, just following human belief.

 

[Ares]

Maybe the seed of the serpent is cain? GOD didnt acknowledge cains offering but it is never stated why? Only if u do right there is uplift, if u do not sin crouches at the door, its urge is towards you, yet u can b its master. The tree, fruit and snake is the story just metaphorical? Could the fruit be fruit of the womb? The snake a penis? The symbol of the tree, thats a little tricky. In kabbalism the rightside emanations of GOD are called the tree of life or the holy angels, the leftside emanations are called the unholy angels. Genesis 3:22 man has bcome like 1 of us what if he stretches out his hand and take from the tree of life and eat and live for ever? Since the right is the holy angels or the tree of life, could the left be the unholy or tree of knowledge? Demon comes from the greek word Daemon meaning knowledge. Eat means to absorb, So Eve absorb knowledge from the tree of life, but what kind of knowledge? A snake in dreams means a penis,fruit or fruit of the womb, seed or semen, maybe it was sex that she learned, Adam and Eves eyes were opened and they realized they were naked. Maybe cain is the serpents seed and thats why God Didnt acknowledge the offering. Please excuse the ramblings of a mad hermit. I will shut up, hope I didnt go to far of subject.Please excuse my boldness, I tend to think miles outside the box.

 

[Ares]

opps made an mistake eve absorbed knowledge from the tree of knowledge. my bad.

 

[gnostic]

The tree, fruit and snake is the story just metaphorical? Could the fruit be fruit of the womb? The snake a penis? The symbol of the tree, thats a little tricky.

That's...that's a little too Freudian and Jungian for me. :cover: