solved, as is well known, by the doctrine that the serpent of Eden was
the mouthpiece or impersonation of the devil. The idea appears first in
Alexandrian Judaism in Wisd. 224 ('by the envy of the devil, death
entered into the world'): possibly earlier is the allusion in En. lxix. 6,
where the seduction of Eve is ascribed to a Satan called Gadreel. Cf.
Secrets of En. xxxi. 3 ff., Ps. Sol. 49; also Ber. R. 29, the name (
Hebrew characters)
(Sifrê 138 b), and in the NT Jn. 844, 2 Co. 113, Ro. 1620, Ap. 129
202 (see Whitehouse, DB, iv. 408 ff.). Similarly in Persian mythology
the serpent Dahâka, to whose power Yima, the ruler of the golden age,
succumbs, is a creature and incarnation of the evil spirit Angro-Mainyo
(Vend. i. 8, xxii. 5, 6, 24; Yaçna ix. 27; cf. Di. 70). The Jewish and
Christian doctrine is a natural and legitimate extension of the teaching
of Gn. 3, when the problem of evil came to be apprehended in its real
magnitude; but it is foreign to the thought of the writer, although it
cannot be denied that it may have some affinity with the mythological
background of his narrative. The religious teaching of the passage
knows nothing of an evil principle external to the serpent, but regards
himself as the subject of whatever occult powers he displays: he is simply
a creature of Yahwe distinguished from the rest by his superior subtlety.
The Yahwistic author does not speculate on the ultimate origin of evil;
it was enough for his purpose to have so analysed the process of temptation
that the beginning of sin could be assigned to a source which
is neither in the nature of man nor in God. The personality of the
Satan (the Adversary) does not appear in the OT till after the Exile
(Zec. Jb. Ch.).
The serpent shows his subtlety by addressing his first
temptation to the more mobile temperament of the woman
(Ra. al.), and by the skilful innuendo with which he at once
invites conversation and masks his ultimate design.—Ay, and so God has said, etc.!] Something like this seems to be
the force of (Hebrew characters) (v.i.). It is a half-interrogative, half-reflective
exclamation, as if the serpent had brooded long
over the paradox, and had been driven to an unwelcome
conclusion.—Ye shall not eat of any tree] The range of the
prohibition is purposely exaggerated in order to provoke
inquiry and criticism. The use of the name (Hebrew characters) is
1. (Hebrew characters)] The usual order of words when a new subject is introduced,
G-K. § 142 d; Dav. § 105.—(Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters), Aq. Θ (Greek characters),
Σ. (Greek characters) V callidior. The good sense (which appears to be
secondary, cf. Ar. 'arama = 'be ill-natured') is confined to Prov.; elsewhere
(Jb. 512 155) it means 'crafty,' 'wily.' The same distinction is
observed in all forms of the [root] except that in Jb. 513 (Hebrew characters) has the good
sense. The resemblance to (Hebrew characters) in 225 is perhaps accidental.—(Hebrew characters)
GS + (Hebrew characters).—(Hebrew characters)] as a compound part, generally means 'much more
