If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask and he shall

give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. (1 ohn !:1"# This is such a curious verse, especially in the light of knowing that $all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of %od&('om (:)(# and that $the wage of sin is death&('om *:)(#. +ow then is this verse to be understood, Think about it - $there is a sin unto death.& ohn here is not writing of universal sin of all men in the way that .aul spoke of no one being /ustified before %od. 0o, ohn is writing of a particular sin to those who have already accepted 1hrist. I daresay what ohn is speaking of is akin to $the unforgivable sin,& $I will blot his name out of the 2ook of 3ife.& 2efore we go further, I want to highlight the distinction that there are those $who were not found written in the 2ook of 3ife&('ev )4:1!# and those who $%od shall take away his part out of the 2ook of 3ife, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book& ('ev )):15#. There is a distinction between those who were never in the book as opposed to those who were once in the book1. 6o even though believers have an advocate if we sin, there is still a sin that is unforgivable. 7hat can such a sin be, 7herefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy against the +oly 6pirit shall not be forgiven unto men. (8t 1):(1. Also 8k (:)5, 3k 1):14# I have a notion that the answer is actually 9uite straightforward and that the blasphemy of the +oly 6pirit is e9uivalent to making one:s self $truth& or making one:s own $truth.& ;or the +oly 6pirit is the 6pirit of Truth. esus came to testify of the truth and the truth testifies of esus. It is the perversion of truth, via idolatry, disobedience and the $adding to<taking from& %od:s word that is addressed throughout the =ld Testament and culminates with the .harisees. It is the $ye shall be as %od& as uttered in the %arden and to understand its subtlety we should first look at the sin we know did lead to death and work from there. I:ve found it very appropriate, poetic in fact, that the account of the ;all takes place in the %arden: for the very natures of the principle characters of the 2ible are revealed there, as if the very seeds from which the rest of the 2ible grow. In the %arden, we see %od:s acknowledgment of an $Achilles>s heel,& 6atan:s method of attacking that heel and the definition of his $seed,& %od:s plan of reconciliation and the definition of the $woman:s seed,& man:s nature and his complicity or compliance with one of those plans: all within this single account? To discern all of this, first we must look at the Tree-of-@nowledge-of-%ood-and-Avil itself)... no need to eat of it, this information was given freely by %od: And Behovah %od commanded the man, saying $of every tree of the garden you may freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shalt not eat of it: for in the day that you eat thereof you shalt surely die. (%en ):1*-1"# I doubt it needs saying that this isn:t a $tree of general knowledge& or a merely $the tree of the awareness that there is $good& and $evil:& it was the $tree of knowledge of good and evil& and it is a sin to eat of it. Cnderstanding that in many many verses $knowledge& is admonished in the 2ible, it:s time to draw some distinctions. As far as I can tell, these are all of the +ebrew words that are translated as
1 1ompare also .hil D:(, 'ev (:!, 'ev 1":E, AF ():()-(( ) +enceforth $tree&

$knowledge& at some point: a# $da:ath&(, b# $yada&D, c# $ayin&!, d# $nakar&*, e#$de:ah&", f# $dea&:E, g# $madda&5, h# $sekel&14, I# $biynah&11 and /# $biyn&1). I don:t eFpect that the reader necessarily depend upon the 6trong:s definitions towards definitive meaning of these words, but I do eFpect one recogniGe that words in the original language are not necessarily the same of their Anglish translations. ;or eFample, most of us are familiar with $agape,& $eros& and $philo& and understand that they each hold different connotations for what we simply call $love& in Anglish. The meaning of this word $da:ath,& used in %enesis ):1", is more along the lines of $attainment by eFperience& and it denotes the element of cunning or $subtletyH& an ad/ective that is associated with the the serpent in %enesis (:11(. It:s use in association with the tree further indicates that not only is such knowledge forbidden by %od, but also that, in fact, such knowledge it is obtainable? This should be plain enough from the fact that Adam $did eat& and that the tree was never made inaccessible in the way the Tree of 3ife was(%en (:)D#. 2ut what:s more, as pertaining to the tree, are not necessarily the lies 6atan promoted but the truths %od revealed concerning them: their eyes were $opened&(%en (:"# and they did become $as one of us, knowing1D good and evilH& so this testifies to the truth of the potency of the tree I /ust not with the particular results 6atan implied. This testimony by %od lends credence to another admission +e will make at the tower of 2abel: 2ehold, the people is one and they have one language, and this they begin to doH and now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do&(%en 11:*#. A careful consideration of $what they had begun to do& will reveal that the people were $building1!& themselves into the place of %od: and God admits they would be able to do so?H thereby revealing a certain truth to the notion of $becoming as %od through forbidden fruitH& to which +e also testifies towards in %en (:)) and also in the fact that the Tree of 3ife was subse9uently made forbidden and inaccessible to fallen man (%en (:))-)D#. I fear to say that %od has a $weakness,& in recognition of my own limitation of understanding, but clearly %od has acknowledged something eFistent in +is
( +1ED": da:ath: ;rom +(4D!H knowledge:- cunning, Jig-Knorantly, know(-ledge#, Jun-Kawares (wittingly. D +(4D!: yada: A primitive rootH to know (properly to ascertain by seeing#H used in a great variety of senses, figuratively, literally, euphemistically and inferentially (including observation, care, recognition; and causatively instruction, designation, punishment, eitc.#:- (61 definition continues# ! +!E*5: ayin: .robably a primitive word: an eye (literally or figuratively#H by analogy a fountain(as the ey of the landscape#:- affliction, outward appearance, Lbefore, L think best, colour, conceit... (61 definition continues# * +!)(D: nakar: A primitive rootH properly to scrutinize, that is, look intently atH hence (with recognition implied#, to acknowledge, be acquainted with, care for, respect, revere, or (with suspicion implied#, to disregard, ignore, be strange toward, reject, resign, dissimulate(as if ignorant or disowning#... (61 definition continues# " +1EDD. de:ah: ;eminine of +1ED(H knowledge:- knowledge E +1ED(: dea:: ;rom (4D!H knowledge:- knowledge, opinion. 5 +D45(: madda: ;rom +(4D!H intelligence or consciousness&- knowledge, science, thought 14 +"5)): sekel: ;rom +"515H intelligenceH by implication successH- discretion, knowledge, policy, prudence, sense, understanding, wisdom, wise. 11 +55E: biynah: ;rom +55!H understanding:- knowledge, meaning, M perfectly, understanding, wisdom. 1) +55!: biyn: A primitive rootH to separate mentally (or distinguish#, that is, (generally# understand:- attend, consider, be cunning, diligently, direct, discern, elo9uent, fell, inform, instruct, have intelligence, know, (61 definition continues# 1(1ompare $da:ath& it with $dea& in 1 6amuel ):)-(: There is none holy as BehovahH for there is none beside Bou, neither is there any rock like our %od. Talk no more so eFceedingly proudly, let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for Behovah is a %od of knowledge($dea&# and by him actions are weighed. 1D +(4D!: yada 1! +11)5: banah: A primitive rootH to build (literally and figuratively#:-(begin to# build(-er#, obtain children, make, repair, set (up#, M surely. 1ompare with $create&($2ara& +1)!D#, $made&($Asah& +*)1(#, and $formed&($Batsar& +(((!#: all of which are employed within %en 1:1 and %en ):)!#. 7hile definite concepts remain to be determine, the fact that definite distinctions have been made in 6cripture is plain.

creation and perhaps even in +is own very being: an $eFposure& would be a word more consistent with 6cripture. Think about it: if the eating of the apple was rebellion against %od, then it was a rebellion made possible through something He created and/or made possible? And what some would deem $weakness,& I call $/ustice,& because it makes for the allowance of true free-willH for without possibility there is no true choice. 2ut before one /umps to conclusions regarding what I have /ust said on this sub/ect, there is one more $detail& to consider: the distinction between $%od& and $%od& as found in %enesis ) and (. The fact that there are no 9ualifiers(i.e. $Behovah %od,& $the most high %od,& etc# in the conversation between Ave and 6atan makes it incredibly difficult to 6cripturally pinpoint the very notion of $%od& in contrast with the notion of $Behovah %od1*.& 0ow we know that men did not call upon the name of Behovah before the time of 6eth1" and that even Abraham, Isaac and acob did not know %od $by J+isK name, :Behovah1E:& I yet the writer of the .entateuch wrote everything as if they had? 6everal times ! is the name $Behovah& put into the mouths of people who did not $know the name of Behovah& by way of distinction and instructionH that is, the 6cripture was not written that way for no reason. %od, through 8oses: hand, chose the words for these accounts: and %od has left +is specific name out of the discussion between the serpent and Ave? This testifies to the fact that although man can become like $elohyim,& he can never become as $Behovah eloyhimH& another fact that is repeatedly testified to in the 2ible. Adam and Ave And so it is written, The first man Adam, was made a $living soul"#& the last Adam was made a 9uickening spirit. +owbeit, that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the 3ord from heaven. (1 1or 1!:D!-D"# Adam was made a $living soul& and, generally speaking, that $soul& represents the psyche. 7e also recogniGe from 1 1or 1!:D! that the $first Adam& was $natural.& In turn, Ave, who was $taken& from that $soul& and $built)1& by Behovah(%en ):))# from Adam:s $side)),& is the counterpart of that same soul: that to which man must relin9uish his familial)( ties and become one with in order to become $one flesh,& or rather, $a whole person.& And this is not to negate the physical aspect of Ave
1* 0ote: There are also no 9ualifiers in the 1reation account (%en 1:1- %en ):(#, with the first reference to Behovah at %enesis ):D: $These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created in the day that Behovah %od made the earth and the heavens.& 1" And to 6eth, to him also there was born a sonH and he called his name $Anos:& then began men to call upon the name of Behovah. (%en D:)*# 1E And I appeared unot Abraham, unto Isaac and unto acob by the name of :%od Almighty,: but by my name :Behovah: was I not known to them (AF *:(# 15 And there JAbramK built an altar unto Behovah and called upon the name of Behovah.(%en 1):E#. $Abram called on the name of Behovah&(%en 1(:D#. Abram, +agar, Abraham, Isaac all call upon $the name of Behovah.& )4 %!!54: psuche: ;rom %!!5DH breath, that is, (by implication# spirit, abstractly or concretely (the animal sentient principle onlyH thus distinguished on the one hand from %D1!1, which is the rational and immortal soulH and on the other from %)))), which is mere vitality, even of plants: these terms thus eFactly correspond respectively to the +ebrew J+!(1!K, J+"(4"K and J+)D1*K: - heart(L-ily#, life, mind, soul, L us, L you. 6ee Andnotes for +ebrew correspondents. )1 +11)5: banah )) +*"*(: tsela: ;rom +*"*4H a rib (as curved#, literally (of the body# or figuratively (of a door, that is, leaf#H hence a side, literally (of a person# or figuratively (of an ob/ect or the sky, that is, quarter#H architecturally a timber (especially floor or ceiling# or plank (single or collectively, that is, a flooring#:- beam, board, chamber, corner, leaf, plank, rib, side (chamber#. +*"*4: tsala: A primitive rootH probably to curveH used only as denominative from +*"*(, to limp (as if one sided#:- halt. )( That is, the ties(ideological# which he is naturally $born into.& to become one with his $counterpart.& %enesis ):)D is clearly speaking of mankind in generalH $Therefore shall a man....&

being brought from Adam but to discern what more the $cripture is teaching regarding the duality of man through this account% for the concept of the battle between $mind& and $heart,& $spirit& and $flesh,& $obedience& and $sin& are replete throughout the bible - and the principle characterizations start here? In the account of the ;all of man, Adam is the mind and Ave is the heartH we are going to see this in full as we look closer at the account of the ;all. In turn, we will see those $principle characteriGations& developed throughout 6cripture. 2ut first things first... Aarlier we looked at Ave, $the wife,& as representing the +oly 6pirit. 0ow we will see how she is represented in the 6cripture as our own heart. In doing so we learn that it is our very own mind that creates an idolH which in turn defines the only two choices ultimately presented to us. In interest of what I said before regarding the use of the word $%od& in the conversation between Ave and the serpent, I:m going to 9uote the word used in the @ N translation ($elohiym)D&# in every instance that it appears. 0ow the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Behovah %od had made. And he said unto the woman, $:;urthermore)! has elohiym said, :Bou shall not eat of every tree of the garden,:& Apparently Ave had been talking with the serpent before the 9uoted statement. I think it was innocent to do so at this point, there was no command against it nor is there any indication in the 6cripture that either Adam or Ave had any recognition of the serpent:s malevolence or intent)*. The serpent asks a fair 9uestion in the course of their conversation: $6o did %od really say that..,& Ave could have as well said, $Bes, yes +e did. Adam told me& or $%od told me&(i.e. $it is written&#, whatever was the caseH surely she knew the command. 2ut instead she she responds: 7e may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, elohiym has said, $Bou shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.& 0otice she doesn:t get it 9uite right. %od commanded them not to eat it, +e didn:t mention anything about not touching it. +e also said they would $surely die& if they ate. Ave said $we may not eat it or touch it, $lest& we die.& $3est& is akin to $perchance& or $beware in case:& it:s certainly not the same as $surely.& Also notice how she is readily $speaking the serpent:s language& by the omission of the definite 9ualifier $Behovah.& .ersonally, I used to also consider this an honest mistakeH thinking that Ave had been told %od:s command by Adam and not directly by %od. 2ut then, the 6cripture doesn:t say how or where Ave got her information. =n the other hand, the 6cripture does say that she was taken out of Adam(who had already received the command at that point# and built by Behovah. Therefore I now believe that the 6cripture testifies to the fact that &ve had the e'act same information that (dam hadH being $flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones)"& - his $other half,& so to speak. 'ight or wrong on that point, Ave:s
)D +D(4: elohiym: .lural of +D((H gods in the ordinary senseH but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article# of the supreme GodH occasionally applied by a way of deference to magistratesH and sometimes as a superlative. )! 1ompound word: +*(": aph: A primitive particleH meaning accession(used as an adverb or con/ugationH also or yea, adversatively thoughH -also, L although, and (furthermore, yet,# but, even, Lhow much less(more, rather than, moreover, with, yea +(!EE: kiy: A primitive particle (the full form of the prepositional prefiF# indicating casual relations of all kinds, antecedent or conse9uentH (by implication# very widely used as a relative con/ugation or adverbH often largely modified by other particles anneFed: (61 definition continues# )* The reference towards the serpent:s $sublety& in verse 1 is made by the writer but does not implicate Adam or Ave as towards awareness of that fact )" A reoccurring phrase that signifies $oneness&

response records the first deviation from truth and<or authority directly recorded in the 2ible. And now 6atan is about to pitch his first recorded lie: A cocktail of truth and error... with a $monkey paw& chaser: Bou shall not surely die. ;or elohiym does know that in the day you eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as elohiym, knowing($yada&# good and evil. 3ie: $Bou shall not surely die.& They did die that day in one form or another. Truth: $;or elohiym does know that in the day you eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as elohiym knowing good and evil.& %od did know that would happen, and their eyes were opened(%en (:"# and they did become $as one of us, knowing good(also $yada&# and evil& (%en (:))#. 8onkey:s .aw: Their $eyes being opened& and $being as elohyim& were not eFactly the $positives& as would be assumed by the tone of the account, which we can assume from the luster of 6atan:s speech and the description of Ave:s response. The first thing their $open eyes& noticed was that they were naked, which instilled fear(in Adam, at least. %en (:14#. And it can well be assumed that they realiGed that being as $elohiym& is not the same as being as Behovah)EH a truth repeatedly testified to in the 2ible. 6o first Ave, in discussion with 6atan, deviates the $command& of Behovah. Then, 6atan assures her with lies and entices her with power: $all that is in the world: the desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, and the pride of life& which are $not of the ;ather but are of the world& (1 ohn ):1*#. 'ead in $%enesisese:& And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes)5, and a tree to be desired to make one wise(4... (%en (:*# Bou see, Ave didn:t eat the apple because 6atan tricked her, she ate it because she wanted to) 6atan merely told her what she needed to hear in order to do so during the course of their conversation. There is a plethora of information given in those tiny phrases, especially $desired to make one wise&<&the pride of life.& Those phrases are e9uated and essentially indicate the source to which all other sins may be traced: the active glorification of self, and by eFtension, mankind. esus himself eFplains this: ;or from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All of these evil things come from within and defile the man. (8ark ":15-)4#(1 0ow compare that definition with the the definition of $all of the trees of the garden,& including the tree of life, of which Adam and Ave were $free to eat.&
)E $7ho is like unto you, = Behovah, among the gods, 7ho is like you- glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders...(AF 1!:11# )5 +!E*5: ayin: .robably a primitive wordH an eye (literally of figuratively#H by analogy a fountain (as the eye of the landscape#:- affliction, outward appearance, L before, Lthink best, colour, conceit, Lbe content.(61 definition continues# (4 +"515: sakal: A primitive rootH to be (causeatively make or act# circumspect and hence intelligent:- consider, eFpert, instruct, prosper, (deal# prudent (-ly#, (give# skill (-ful#, have good success, teach, (61 definition continues, but this is not the standard $+appy is the man that finds wisdom and the man that gets understanding& word. (1 6ee also, 8t 1!:15-)4

And out of the ground made Behovah %od to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight() and good for food, the tree of life in the midst of the garden and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (%en ):5# $A tree to be desired to be desired to make one wise.& Ave wanted something beyond what %od freely prescribed, /ust as does our own hearts. %od forbade the tree for good reason: not because He would kill them, but because it would kill them as the poison that it is? If it was %od:s /udgment to destroy man for disobedience, +e would not have a $need& or reason to remedy that disobedience: but since man is destroyed by disobedience, %od provided a remedy out of +is grace and mercy - and the rest of the 2ible becomes a story of allegiances, starting with Adam: ...she took of the fruit thereof and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. (%en (:*# $And to her husband with her&(?#. The 6cripture indicates Adam was there at the time that she ate and I believe this is for good reason and along the line of thought already mentioned(i.e. the $two were one#. Aither way, to say whether or not Adam was present during Ave:s discussion with the serpent is to speculateH the 6cripture does not say. 6uffice to say, Adam:s act was not one of $deviance& or $subversion,& as Ave:s was. Adam:s action was an open rebellion: a direct, willful disobedience. In the same $bite,& Adam made Ave an idol by giving to her that which %od commanded: obedience. %od said, $do not,& Ave said, $here,& and Adam $did eatH& breaking %od:s command and ushering death into the world. Is this nothing short of ames: description of ourselves, 3et no man say, when he is tempted, $I am tempted of %od: for %od cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts he any man. 2ut every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own desire and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death. ( ames 1:1(-1!# 7hy yes, yes it is. ;ortunately, that:s not all +e wrote. 3et:s look at the $;allout& and see if the assertions made so far are consistent and what else we can determine if so. 6o far, what mankind had :ac9uired: was the :yada: of :da:ath& and I call this part of the lesson of %enesis (: $The ;irst +and Ac9uisition of ;orbidden @nowledge Through 6orcery, 6ubversion and 'ebellionH A 6urvey of 6elf-7ill and The =rigins of Oeath.& 6atan, on the other hand, gained something new: $agents.& 8an, having his $eyes opened& through sin, was now a $free agent& to do 6atan:s bidding. This being so, another $overarching precedent& is disclosed in the neFt section of the story: the $seed of the woman& vs. $seed of the serpent&... and $plans of attack& of both are revealed. The ;allout And they knew they were naked. (%en (:"# 2efore we continue, I:d like to mention is this very verse that is bringing us to the $9uestion of 1anaan& by way of eFamining the ;all. 2y that I mean: +am:s story, of which 1anaan:s fate is
() +D"!E: mar:eh: ;rom +")44H a view (the act of seeing#H also an appearance (the thing seen4, whether (real# a shape (especially if handsome, comelinessH often plural the looks#, or (mental# a vision: (61 definition continues#. +")44: ra:ah: A primitive rootH to see, literally or figuratively (in numerous applications, direct and implied, transitively, intransitively and causatively#: (61 definition continues#

inherited, starts immediately with his discovery of his father:s nakedness. 2eing in search of 6criptural definitions, it did not seem prudent to overlook such an obvious association between the ;all and +am. I mean, what did such $nakedness& imply or represent, 7hat was +am:s sin, 7hat was the precedent or conteFt, At any rate, I wanted to assure the reader that the $rabbit& is being chased for all good reason. 'eturning to our sub/ects in the %arden, isn:t it strange that their own $eFposure& is the first thing that they $knew,& =n top of that, it was not something that they seemed to embraced or feel empowered by in their new-found state of $being as elohiymH& rather they became fearful in the presence of Behovah. At least Adam did. In verse 14 he confesses that he was $afraid.& As for Ave it merely states that $Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Behovah %od among the trees of the garden&(%en (:E#. The fact that they are recorded as having $sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons& is surely as symbolically foreshadowing as the $coats of skins& that Behovah made for them (%en (:)1#. In these simple figures are the entire concepts of $man:s :covering: his :eFposure: by the law of 8oses& vs. $man:s being :covered: by the sacrifice of 1hrist& which will be developed and refined throughout 6cripture. It cannot be overlooked that both Adam:s and Ave:s open honesty in verses 14-1( are nothing short of true confession. 1ompare their responses to %od:s 9uestioning ($This is what happened and this is what I did&# with 1ain:s response to %od:s 9uestioning ($get off my back&# in the neFt chapter (%en D:5#. 0eFt comes the $responsibility:& Adam blames Ave who blames the serpent, who has no recourse. I used to think of it simply as the $blame game,& but %od appears to be sympathetic to their reasoning processes, as may be discerned in +is pronouncements. 0ote the uses of $because& in %od:s pronouncements. To the serpent: 2ecause you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle and above every beast of the field. Cpon your belly shalt you go and dust shalt you eat all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seedH it shall bruise(( your head and you shalt bruise(D his heel. (%en (:1D-1!# This is the part I was talking about when I said that %od:s $plan of attack& would be established. I:d like to point out that the word $bruise& in this verse is the same word in both instances. +is $plan to redeem man& was mentioned earlier and but is not revealed in 6cripture until verse )1 of this chapter. +is plan of attack, through the $woman:s seed,& is to $attack the head:& the vital organ, the nerve center, the principle part, that which is primary I and to attack directly and openly at that. %od is not concerned with attacking the symptoms of sin, +e is concerned with attacking the source of sin and healing the symptoms. +e is not at war with $evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, etc.,& but he is at war because of them. +e is at war the sources, the $principalities(!& if you will, from which they flow? And though he has defeated them, $having spoiled principalities and powers, JmakingK a show of them openly, triumphing over them in Jthe crossK& (1ol ):1!#, +e has defeated them, but they have not been destroyed, yet(*. All of this is to say that there is as much of a distinctive $seed of the serpent& as there is a $seed of the woman,& but we:ve largely lost track of their definitions and intents. In doing so, the vast ma/ority of believers are blindly supporting the wrong team under wiley leadership and ill definitions. This will become more apparent as, if, you read on.
(( +"""5: shuph: A primitive rootH properly to gape, that is, snap atH figuratively to overwhelm: -break, bruise, cover (D I:ve heard it 9uoted that $it shall $crush& your head, and you shall bruise his heel& and that seems true in the ultimate sense: but it is not written that way and the rendering /ust 9uoted borders on misleading. (! %"D*: arche: ;rom %"!*H (properly abstract#, a commencement, or (concrete# chief (in various applications of order, time, place or rank#: -beginning, corner, (at the, the# first (estate#, magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule. %"!*: archomai: 8iddle voice of %"!" (though the implication of precedence#H to commence (in order of time#: rehearse from the begin (-ning#. (* 'efer to appropriate section

2y contrast to the $seed of the woman,& %od declares the plan of attack of the $seed of the serpent.& I do not say $pronounce& because the serpent had already revealed his intent and method. I believe %od declared it as an instruction and a warning for us? I mean, why else would it be stated that the serpent:s seed would $strike at JourK heel,:& our weakness, the only possible eFposed area of the priest, the rear, striking from behind and in subtlety, 6atan cannot fight openly and directly, if he had that kind of might, he:d already have accomplished his plan. 0o, his method is though deception and enticementH to subvert Behovah:s law and order and install himself as %od I but he needs everyone in order to do so(". This element will also become more apparent in due course, but it should be recogniGed at the moment. To the woman: Cnto the woman +e said, $I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conceptionH in sorrow you shalt bring forth children and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. (%en (:1*# The $woman& receives no $because.& I believe this supports the earlier assertion of her identification with the heartH for although %od declares the heart as $deceitful above all things& ( er 1":5#, man has no control over it:s desires unless %od +imself gives him a $new heart&(AGek (*:)*)"#. This further signifies $the wife:s $role& as either the +oly 6pirit or the will of man: either the $helper towards %od& or the $helper towards self.& +er $sorrow and conception& are $greatly multipliedH& notice it does not say $your sorrow in conception.& Then, it says $in sorrow you shalt bring forth children.& There is a definite distinction made and it stands to reason that %od has made a pronouncement regarding the heart of man as well as the physical woman: as Ave had not even had a single child at that point as far as the 6cripture has stated. This may be a good time to note that out of all the creatures created in %enesis 1, man was the only creature not described as producing, or to produce, as $after its kind.& In tandem with that thought is the fact that man also was given dominion over everything- eFcept man, himself or otherwise. Taking into account the use of $birth pangs& in the 2ible by way of illustrative description(E, it is not far-fetched, rather $very likely& that this pronouncement regarding $conception& pertains to the $desires of the heart coming to fruition& or thereabouts. Aspecially considering the $in sorrow you shall bring forth children& that immediately followsH a pronouncement much less ambiguous. That said, perhaps the verse does plainly mean $I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your pregnancyH in sorrow you will give birthH& but I think this less likely considering in con/unction with $your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over thee& as I believe that pronouncement has a dual meaning as well, considering the struggle between $the heart and the head& and all that:s been considered thus far. To Adam: And unto Adam he said, $2ecause you have hearkened unto the voice of your wife and has eaten of the tree which I commanded you, saying, :Bou shalt not eat of it:: cursed is the ground for your sake. In sorrow shall you eat of it all the days of your life. Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee and you shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face shalt you eat bread, till you return unto the groundH for out of it were you taken. ;or dust you are and to dust shalt thou return.
(" As per %en 11:*, Tower of 2abel (E er )):)(, er DE:D1, er D5:)), er !4:D(, 8icah D:5 (those are only referencing $pangs,& and no other synonyms such as $pains& or $trevail.&

Again, the $because.& %od is essentially saying, $you listened to your wife instead of what I said.& In the larger conteFt of the $mind& discussed earlier, $you conformed your intellect to the desires of your heart.& I find Adam:s charge no different than ours: 1asting down imaginations and every high thing that eFalts itself against the knowledge of %od, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of 1hrist. () 1or 14:!# 8ake what you want of that, but be sure to consider it before you discount it. I, of course, am convinced of the heart<mind analogy of Adam<Ave for the reasons already discussedH but to reiterate: this in no way negates or replaces the physical actuality of the two people, it:s merely a recurring $device& that 6cripture often speaks of more than one thing at a time. Anyway, we:ve already discussed that. And as the $simple& things are $simple,& it is the deeper meaning and definitions which this paper seeks to discern. Anyway, maybe I already said that. I:ve been away from this paper for a few days. 1arrying on with the analogy, $the ground& becomes an interesting concept also. It:s not immediately relevant nor do I wish to eFamine the concept, but I do want to leave the reader with a little something to think about. That something is the figurative use of $thorns and thistles& found elsewhere in 6cripture. There are many references to $thorns& and<or $briers& but I:ve chosen the verse below as it employs both of the very same +ebrew words as %enesis (:1E. 0otice the thorns and thistles $come up:& The high places also of Aven, the sin of Israel, shall be destroyed: the thorn and the thistle shall come up on their altars and they shall say to the mountains, $1over usH& and to the hills, $;all on us.& = Israel, you have sinned... (+os 14:E-5# 1anaan And +am, the father of 1anaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren without. (%enesis 5:))# 7e were supposed to be looking at 1anaan, weren:t we, The background was necessary because 1anaan:s heritage is aligned with another story involving $nakedness.& If Adam:s story is indicative of one:s response to the discovery of %od:s $heel,& then +am:s story is the other. Instead of confession and redemption, +am displays eFploitation(declaration, manifestation#(5 of his father:s nakedness. Again I believe it need be stressed that the $nakednessD4& mentioned here speaks of more than mere physical nudity and there are a few 6criptures I:d like to point out before we proceed. There are a myriad of verses dealing with $nakedness& but I believe these few will highlight the association between the words $unclean,& $shame& and $nakedness& ($nakedness& being a fundamental concept#. In turn, we also recogniGe more the disassociation of ideas that occur so naturally from $plain Anglish& translations.
(5 +!4D*: nagad: A primitive rootH properly to front, that is, stand boldly out oppositeH by implication (causatively#, to manifestH figuratively to announce (always by word of mouth to one present#H specifically to e'pose, predict, e'plain, praise (61 definition continues#. D4 +*1"): :ervah: ;rom +*1*EH nudity, literally (especially the pudenda# or figuratively (disgrace, blemish#: -nakedness, shame, unclean(-ness#. +*1*E: :arah: A primitive rootH to be(causatively make# bareH hence to empty, pour out, demolish:- leave destitue, discover, empty, make naked, pour (out#, spread self, uncover.

6o does the king of Asshur lead the captivity of Agypt and the removal of 1ush, young and old, naked and barefoot, with seat uncovered I the nakedness of Agypt. (Isa )4:D B3T# I:ve 9uoted the Boung:s 3iteral Translation here because I believe it makes more clear the concept of $figurative nudity.& The @ N reads $to the shame of Agypt& and surely obscures the idea when read in $face-value& Anglish. 2ut moreover: ;or Behovah your %od walks in the midst of your camp to deliver you and to give up your enemies before youH therefore shall your camp be holy, that +e see no naked (@ N, $unclean&# thingD1 in you and turn away from you. (Oeut )(:1D# 7hen a man has taken a wife and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favourD) in his eyes because he has found some nakedness (@ N, $uncleanliness# in herH then let him write her a bill of divorcement... (Oeut )D:1# 7hat:s more is that in considering this $:ervah& in comparison with the $aromD(& of %enesis ):)! we can also comprehend more clearly that there is an $innocent& or $good& designation of $nakedDD& as well as a $disobedient& or $bad& designation of naked. : And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. (%en ):)!# 1ompare the $man and his wife:s& nakedness of %enesis ):)! with the nakedness they discovered in %enesis (:". It is interesting to note that both words derive from the same root word but each has a particular connotation. And the eyes of them both were opened and they knew that they were nakedD!... (%en (:"# 6o yesH /ust as the account of the ;all, an even that takes place soon after 1reation, speaks volumes more than a mere $general disobedience,& so does the story of +am, an event that takes place soon after the deliverance of 1reation, relate the continuation of that line At this point we may want to pause and marvel at the fact that although %od destroyed all flesh, +e did also preserve the $clean& with the $not clean& (%en ":)#, and this included the $seed of the serpent.& As $nakedness& was the result of Adam:s sin, $nakedness& was the cause of +am:s. I believe the account of +am:s discovery of his father:s nakedness speaks volumes more than a son witnessning his father:s nudity.
D1 +1*5": dabar: ;rom +1*5*H a wordH by implication a matter (as spoken of# thingH adverbially a cause (61 definition continues# D) +)!E4: chen: ;rom +)*4(H graciousness, that is, sub/ectively (kindness, favor# or ob/ectively (beauty#. (61 definition continues#. This word is widely translated as $grace& in the @ N. D( +*1"D: :arom: ;rom +*151 (in its original sense#H nude, either partially or totally: -naked. +*151: :aram: A primitive rootH properly to be (or make# bareH but used only in the derived sense (through the idea perhaps of smoothness# to be cunning (usually in a bad sense##H -(61 definition continues#. DD 6ee Isa )4:), 1 6am 15:)D, ob 1:)1, Isa !E:", D! +!54(: :eyrom: ;rom +*151H nudity: - naked (-ness#

Adam and Ave discovered his own nakedness through disobedience<da:aath +am discovered his fathers nakedness and also of repentance and redemption of their own $nakedness& and subse9uent confession and redemptionD*,

D* If we confess our sins, he is faithful and /ust to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 ohn 1:5#