Prooftext 1c – Gen. 3:15 – Who are the “seed,” “offspring”?

[First posted June 28, 2012.  Read this in connection with other posts: 

Q&A: “If the devil doesn’t exist, how come the snake/serpent in the story was punished by the Creator for tempting Eve?”  

  If you haven’t yet read the posts associated with this, please check out: 

• Prooftext 1a – Genesis 3:15 – Who is the “woman”?
• Prooftext 1b – Genesis 3:15 – Who is the “serpent”?
• Prooftext 1d – Serpent Symbolism – Postscript

—Admin1]

—————————-

Context, we said, determines the meaning of any text.  Divorced from context, any verse could be easily misinterpreted.  Checking out the immediate context leading to this “prooftext” under scrutiny, God has just pronounced a curse on the serpent—

Genesis/Bereshith 3:14 YHWH, God, said to the snake:  

Let us pause for a moment and address why God would curse the serpent if he is a personification of man’s inner tendency to go against Divine Will.  One of the Rabbis who answered this question explained it only in terms of what the serpent was at the beginning of the story— more shrewd than all the living-things of the field—- and how he degenerates into a belly-crawling-dust-eating lowly creature whom man will from hence on shun or be hostile toward.  The point?  The creature with free will [man] affects all of creation adversely when he chooses to violate God’s instructions/teachings/laws.   But how does this fit in the interpretation we have presented so far?  

Well, look at it this way — real serpents do crawl on their bellies and bite the dust; in fact that has been presented as part of the reason for this narrative, to explain why snakes and people keep away from each other. Think as well, that God does curse the serpents of desire in ourselves which should stay where they are, not aroused to inject through an unguarded bite  its poison of sinful tendencies.  

Enough of the serpent, who is the serpent’s “seed”? And who is Eve’s “offspring”? 

First the translator’s choice of words:  is “seed” the same as “offspring”?

• Why does NASB use “seed” while the Hebrew translation [ArtScroll] use “offspring”?
• Are the words interchangeable, like synonyms or does the word choice deviate from the intended meaning of the verse?

We always refer to the dictionary first because it reflects the consensus among word users of what any word in English basically or literally means, so according to Webster:

• “seed” – a flowering plant’s unit of reproduction, capable of developing into another such plant.
• “offspring” – a person’s child or children.

One suggests ‘potential’ while the other suggests ‘result’.  Seed is a botanical word, it’s something you plant and cultivate which develops into a mature plant.  Offspring appears to apply to the procreation or generation of human beings.  Seed has yet to develop while offspring is already on a functioning level of maturity.

Which word is more suited to the intended meaning of the verse?  Actually in our interpretation of this verse, both concepts come in handy.  Let us now identify who the seed/offspring are:

• “Her” offspring would be — first and foremost, her firstborn Cain . . . and thereafter, Abel, Seth, and all the generations that spring from this first woman, the one with the capability to birth babies.  In short, “her” offspring would be all of mankind but if you were in Eve’s place, remembering God’s words, she would think it’s Cain.  And indeed, Cain is a perfect example of failure to heed God’s warning, just like his parents.
• The “serpent’s” seed — notice the word we prefer to use for the serpent is seed and not offspring  because the serpent’s seed has only a potential; it could be nipped in the bud and  does not have to develop into “offspring,”

If we have identified the serpent as that innate part of human nature that provides alternative choice, simply because humans have free will — then the seed of the serpent is that continuing tendency in mankind to make a choice that could lead to harm for himself and others, that could alienate him from his Creator-God.  The words ethical, moral, righteousness all come into the picture—there is a way to live that is right and even people who have not been exposed to Torah have innate goodness.  It is a choice man is free to make.

So far, we have missed discussing one more word:  “enmity” which exists between the woman and the serpent as placed there by God. This enmity/antipathy passes on to their seed/offspring.  How does this work within the framework we have set up?  If the innate desire for forbidden things is within human nature, humans will be aware of it, might even have a natural aversion toward it but could also succumb to it just as Eve did, just as Adam did, just as Cain did. Our awareness of this side within our human nature is something we wish we didn’t have; nobody thinks it’s a blessing, if anything it’s a potential to suffer a bad consequence.  Everyone who indulges in the forbidden — whether it’s as neutral [not sinful] as fatty and junk food or smoking which they know are bad for their health — has that built-in red flag as reminder for “not good, you’ll be sorry.” That side of our nature we don’t like [enmity] but we indulge it nevertheless [choice].

The other words to contend with:  the interaction between the seeds/offspring:

•  bruise head/bruise heel,
• pound head/bite heel,
• snap head/smash heel.

What’s with the head and heel, why not head to head and heel to heel? It looks like an uneven fight, but then the figures involved are not equal: man who stands tall and serpent who has no height and stays only on the level of man’s heel.  In fact, this could be the very clue to what our Creator God expects from humankind. We have been given free will; we are superior, not inferior to that part of our nature that tends to go against His Divine Will: they will bruise you on the head, you will bruise them in the heel. Does that sound like we’re struggling from a point of utter defeat? On the contrary, it already sounds victorious!

Of the three translations, the ArtScroll choice of words fit best in the framework we have set up.  Here are two contenders within man:

•  a tendency to choose good and
• a tendency to choose bad or evil.

Does God say they are equal contenders? Not at all, man can pound the head of the serpent’s seed, in effect totally crush it; the serpent’s seed can only bite man’s heel, perhaps bruise is a better word to use here.  

Man can dominate that innate tendency to choose bad/wrong/evil, in fact win over it.  But that tendency can do the littlest harm if allowed to ‘bite one’s heel’ and could cause great harm if the poison is allowed to spread and defeat man.  Man has the ability to control the situation and influence the ending.

Let’s now go to the text immediately after Gen. 3:15 and apply it all now to Eve’s offspring, firstborn son Cain.  The seed of the serpent immediately raises its presence in Cain when his offering is not looked upon with favor by God.  We have discussed Cain lengthily in another article so please read that because we will discuss only what is connected to the specific points raised here.

God warns Cain that sin is crouching at the door . . . but Cain can dominate it.  That seed of the serpent — potential to sin has not had any advantage yet,  Cain is simply feeling dejected, his face is downcast, he has not taken his negative feelings any further . . . and God warns him he doesn’t have to allow sin to enter in; keep the door closed; that serpent’s seed does not have to be given the opportunity to bite his heel and thus spread its poison.

Well, Cain does not heed Gods’ warning.  The serpent’s seed gains ground on Cain and before we know it, he commits fratricide, among other sins.  And yet study how God treats Cain, the first murderer . . .

To sum up:  There is enmity, a natural hostility between Eve’s offspring [Cain and all mankind] and the serpent’s seed [innate tendency to go against the Divine Will and harm self and others]. Man does not like that part of his nature but whether or not he will give in to it is his choice.  He cannot blame his choice on anyone else, not even his innate serpent of desire.  He has the ability to tame it, he need not succumb to it, he is not helpless before it, unlike the teaching about original sin.

There are good and righteous men singled out by God in the generations after Cain, Abel and Seth, it’s all about choice, not helplessness to inherited sin!

You might be thinking  . . . why belabor every little detail of this prooftext?

• Because it is foundational;
• because it has been misinterpreted;
• because if one understands the message in this narrative in the book of beginnings, then a whole belief system is built up on the initial understanding and therefore it affects how one lives his life, how one behaves and acts according to his accepted belief system.
• because a proper understanding of it ultimately leads to his knowing the One True God, Creator, Revelator on Sinai—as well as an understanding of himself, what he is capable of achieving, in service to God and fellowman.

Deuteronomy 30:  

How much simpler can it get?  

Love YHWH that we may live . . .

choose life so that  we will live . . .

YHWH is our life and the length of our days.  

    NSB@S6K