Prometheus as The Serpent?

[one_raven]

According to an 8th century BCE legend, Prometheus tricked Zeus by stuffing beef into the belly of an Ox and wrapping the bull horns in “glistening fat” to trick him into taking the inedible horns from an offering.
This pissed Zeus off and he hid fire from humans, but Prometheus stole it back and returned it to the humans.
In a later revision (700 BCE), Zeus stole “the means of life” from man and said, “you would easily do work enough in a day to supply you for a full year even without working; soon would you put away your rudder over the smoke, and the fields worked by ox and sturdy mule would run to waste.”
He also created Pandora (the first mortal woman) to punish man. She carried a jar with her which contained “evils, harsh pain and troublesome diseases which give men death”.

So, Zeus, angry with man disobeying him by the prodding of the trickster, punished man by causing man to toil in dry fields, and sent him disease and death.

Zeus also gave the trickster eternal punishment.

This sounds awfully familiar to me.
Is it just me?

[one_raven]

Oops.
I wanted this in Comparative Religion.
Can someone please move it?

[Existo]

According to an 8th century BCE legend, Prometheus tricked Zeus by stuffing beef into the belly of an Ox and wrapping the bull horns in “glistening fat” to trick him into taking the inedible horns from an offering.
This pissed Zeus off and he hid fire from humans, but Prometheus stole it back and returned it to the humans.
In a later revision (700 BCE), Zeus stole “the means of life” from man and said, “you would easily do work enough in a day to supply you for a full year even without working; soon would you put away your rudder over the smoke, and the fields worked by ox and sturdy mule would run to waste.”
He also created Pandora (the first mortal woman) to punish man. She carried a jar with her which contained “evils, harsh pain and troublesome diseases which give men death”.

So, Zeus, angry with man disobeying him by the prodding of the trickster, punished man by causing man to toil in dry fields, and sent him disease and death.

Zeus also gave the trickster eternal punishment.

This sounds awfully familiar to me.
Is it just me?

You mean the name "Yahweh" comes up? Certainly. Surely the stories in the OT are re hashes of earlier myths?

[one_raven]

You mean the name "Yahweh" comes up? Certainly. Surely the stories in the OT are re hashes of earlier myths?

Some, sure.
Was this one?
I would like to find a direct connection - or some evidence.
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation.
It could very well be a case of simple archetypal story-telling.
God is perfect - man is subservient - man breaks free of God to grasp the gauntlet of of self-determination. It's an ages old idea that is reflective of the children leaving the protective bosom of their parents.

[madanthonywayne]

Consider also, the name Lucifer means bringer of light. A good name for the god who brought mankind fire. Apparently, there was a book written on this subject back in the fiftees: Lucifer and Prometheus by R.J. Zwi Werblowsky. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_and_Prometheus)

[one_raven]

Sweet. Thanks for the info, madanthonywayne.

[zetetic0void]

Here are some thoughts (you may or may not agree). Religions and mythologies are full of symbolism and I think trying to see them as symbolic is the best way to get anything out of them.
--------

Prometheus was chained to the mountain where the eagle (offspring of Echidna and Typhon) ate his liver daily ... the liver was known as the organ that regenerated (perhaps known due to observation after injuries from battles).

He was punished this way for bringing fire (knowledge, technology, discrimination between things [being conscious of duality], etc) to humans.


The snake in the garden of Eden was fulfilling a similar role as Prometheus in offering knowledge to humans (although some argue that the tree was "The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" , it may have been more general than that and including knowledge of seeing aspects of duality ... so translated more like "Tree of Knowledge: both good and evil"

------

It's interesting to note that in the 12 labours of Hercules (Greek's Heracles), the 11th labour was to get the Apples of Hesperides. They were in a 'blissful garden' (now, I am personally curious if these apples somehow represented some type of symbol for enlightenment, cosmic consciousness, nirvana, or whatever the Greeks would have labeled this experience).

During this 11th labour he killed the eagle tormenting Prometheus and also freed Prometheus.

In this way he becomes equivalent to Christ as the redeemer of the initial 'fall' of taking the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge



perhaps these are the similarities...

--------
Snake giving fruit of Knowledge = Prometheus giving Fire

Crucifixion of Christ = Prometheus chained to mountain/ eagle eating liver

Resurrection of Christ = Hercules freeing Prometheus
--------


Both the crucifixion of Christ and the freeing of Prometheus by Hercules are the actions which balance out the initial problem (the problem of gaining knowledge).

----------

It is interesting that the eagle sent daily to torment the chained Prometheus was eating his liver.

The spear which was jabbed at the side of Christ on the cross appears in paintings and images I've seen to be piercing the body at around the same spot ... the area of the liver.

I wonder what the liver symbolized to the ancients.

-----------

There is a symbol often seen within Christianity of the snake on the cross. I'm not an expert on this but it surely is a very interesting symbol.

[one_raven]

From what I understand (though I am unsure how far this tradition goes back) the liver, not the heart, was believed to be the seat of human emotion.

[Michael]

You mean the name "Yahweh" comes up? Certainly. Surely the stories in the OT are re hashes of earlier myths?where does the name Yahweh come up?

[Doreen]

From what I understand (though I am unsure how far this tradition goes back) the liver, not the heart, was believed to be the seat of human emotion.denends on the culture. The Chinese had what we would call brain functions in the heart. European humour systems attributed different emotions to different organs, the liver often getting anger, for example.

[Michael]

From what I understand (though I am unsure how far this tradition goes back) the liver, not the heart, was believed to be the seat of human emotion.
for the most part it was the heart. I've never read the liver.

Egyptians the heart was the seat of consciousness and subsequently so did most Greeks. Albeit, Plato thought the ventricles (holes in the brain) were used to cool the heart (passion) and so in a way the brain cooled the heart. Aristotle thought it was all heart. Hypocrites interestingly enough thought the mind resided in the brain. Galen thought the mind existed in ventricles of the brain. So did Léonard de Vinci. René Descartes spent a good deal of his life propagating dualism, the mind was in the ether (spirit world) and was connected to the body through the pineal gland and the body was a machine/puppet.

It wasn't really until Phrenology (a defunct field) that people solidly accepted the brain as the seat of the mind.

[one_raven]

for the most part it was the heart. I've never read the liver.

The Roman physician Galen located the seat of the passions in the liver, the seat of reason in the brain, and considered the heart to be the seat of the emotions.

Goethe uses the word "liver" metaphorically for "anger", e.g. "die Leber befreien", i.e. "to vent one's anger". From this originates the expression "von der Leber weg reden", literally "to speak from the liver".

Burmese, too, emotions (especially love) are attributed to liver. It is very common to say "I love you from my liver" to call someone "my liver" in everyday language. The expression "broken liver" has the same meaning as "broken heart" in Western culture, and it is very commonly used. The "heart shape" is called the "liver shape" in Burmese.

In sixteenth-century England, the liver was regarded as the seat of love. There are many references in Shakespeare to this. For example, in As You Like It, Rosalind offers to cure Oliver of love, describing how she had cured another lover:
"And thus I cured him; and this way will I take upon me to wash your liver as clean as a sound sheep's heart, that there shall not be one spot of love in't."
In Korean, a person with a 'big liver' is brave and in common English, “lily livered” means cowardly.

In Chinese there is the expression “wo de gan chang cun duan” which translates to "my liver and intestines are broken into pieces" meaning I am extremely sad. In Chinese if a person has a bad attitude or something, he is said to have a bad liver.


the Hebrew scriptures have. . .
“My eyes do fail with tears,
my bowels are troubled,
my liver is poured upon the earth,
for the destruction of the daughter of my people” Lam 2:11

In Dutch, you also can 'have something on your liver', which means something's bothering you.

Webster’s New World College Dictionary has the fifth definition for liver as:
ARCHAIC the liver thought of as the seat of emotion or desire


The list goes on and on.

[Enmos]

In Dutch, you also can 'have something on your liver', which means something's bothering you.

Specifically something that you did wrong and that you're uncomfortable with.

Is it a coincidence that the liver is a cleansing organ?

[Doreen]

Specifically something that you did wrong and that you're uncomfortable with.

Is it a coincidence that the liver is a cleansing organ?Not according to the Chinese who associate a variety of emotional issues with the Liver (and other organs) and have herbal and other remedies to create greater harmony in it - some of these herbs cleanse the liver of toxins.

[Pandaemoni]

The notion that the serpent in the Garden of Eden is Satan is a Christian tradition that is not assumed in (say) Judaism, and it is not expressly so stated in the Bible until the New Testament (i.e. Christians only, in a new interpretation of the Old Testament). (Remembering that in Judaism Satan is, to this day, a faithful servant of God, not some countervailing presence that God cast out.)

Imagine that the serpent were Satan for a second. God curses all serpents so that they will crawl on their bellies and have enmity between them and women. Would it really be fair for God to punish and curse snakes for the actions Satan took while disguised as a snake? If Satan had stayed in his angelic form, would God have punished all angels everywhere?

In the Christian tradition there are two main reasons cited for why Satan was cast out, but neither is the tricking of Eve. One was that he he tried to overthrow God. A second story says that he refused to bow to Adam when God commended it. The Bible is silent on it, so all we have are non-Biblical legends, but none of them that I know of cite the fall of Adam as the reason for Satan's being cast out.

[Fraggle Rocker]

Fire is a keystone technology in the development of our species, arguably as important as the technology of language. Without fire the food value of the protein and starch in grains and most plant tissue is unavailable to us because we can't digest uncooked cellulose. Humans had to survive on the fruits they could gather and the meat they could hunt. And it was raw meat, at that, which is not easy to eat without a metal blade. It's been estimated that it took a Stone Age human four hours to chew up a day's supply of nutrition in raw meat.

Fire also made our nights immeasurably safer by scaring off many predators and then letting us at least spot the brave ones. It allowed us to migrate to colder climates where the prey animals helpfully carry layers of high-calorie fat. It helped us work stone and wood tools. And of course without fire to melt ore, the Bronze Age would have never happened. Our cities would be like the first cities: made of stone and wood.

There was no fire on earth until the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere reached 13%, the minimum level for combustion, thanks to the spread of land-based plants around 500MYA. Our ancestors had learned how to use naturally occurring fire to cook food around 2MYA, but evidence of controlled fire only goes back to 400KYA. Still, regular use of fire only became widespread quite recently, between 50 and 100KYA. For all we know, it may have been a key technology that helped us successfully migrate out of Africa for the first time.

The Agricultural Revolution is almost universally classified as the first Paradigm Shift: a man-made change in our environment that completely revised our lifestyle; a step in our transcendence of nature. But I think the mastery of fire deserves to be in that category as well.

Prometheus, a stylization of the person who figured out how to create and control fire, is one of the most important figures in our history.

[madanthonywayne]

Imagine that the serpent were Satan for a second. God curses all serpents so that they will crawl on their bellies and have enmity between them and women. Would it really be fair for God to punish and curse snakes for the actions Satan took while disguised as a snake? If Satan had stayed in his angelic form, would God have punished all angels everywhere?Perhaps the serpent was a favorite avatar of Satan, one which was (for some reason) particulary appealing to women. By cursing the serpent and creating enmity between it and women, God takes away that tool and turns it into a symbol of evil.
Fire is a keystone technology in the development of our species, arguably as important as the technology of language. Without fire the food value of the protein and starch in grains and most plant tissue is unavailable to us because we can't digest uncooked cellulose. Humans had to survive on the fruits they could gather and the meat they could hunt.

The Agricultural Revolution is almost universally classified as the first Paradigm Shift: a man-made change in our environment that completely revised our lifestyle; a step in our transcendence of nature. But I think the mastery of fire deserves to be in that category as well.

Prometheus, a stylization of the person who figured out how to create and control fire, is one of the most important figures in our history.
I heard an anthropologist on NPR recently saying that we can infer the mastery of fire by the changes in the anatomy of our ancestors. Even though we only find evidence of actual fire being used by humans for a much shorter time period, the fact that our mouths became relatively small and our disgestive tracts short implies that our ancestors were using fire to cook food. Furthermore, it's been argued that it was the cooking of food that allowed the brains of homo erectus to become twice the size of australopithecis. So the mastery of fire may not only have been a paradign shift, it may well be largely responsible for the development of human intelligence.
source (http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2007/06/did_cooking_allow_for_the_incr.php)

[Fraggle Rocker]

I heard an anthropologist on NPR recently saying that we can infer the mastery of fire by the changes in the anatomy of our ancestors. Even though we only find evidence of actual fire being used by humans for a much shorter time period, the fact that our mouths became relatively small and our disgestive tracts short implies that our ancestors were using fire to cook food.Also, our respiratory tract developed the ability to tolerate smoke in the inhaled air. It puts most animals into distress.Furthermore, it's been argued that it was the cooking of food that allowed the brains of homo erectus to become twice the size of australopithecis. So the mastery of fire may not only have been a paradign shift, it may well be largely responsible for the development of human intelligence.Was that due to an increase in protein in the diet, because we can eat cooked meat faster than raw meat?

One of the few true differences between dogs and wolves--two subspecies of the same species--is that dogs have smaller brains, an adaptation from a predator's diet to the lower-protein diet of a camp scavenger.

Perhaps their brains will get larger again over the next couple of thousand years, now that they're eating cooked meat too.:)

[one_raven]

So which story came first?
The Serpent or Prometheus?


The notion that the serpent in the Garden of Eden is Satan is a Christian tradition that is not assumed in (say) Judaism, and it is not expressly so stated in the Bible until the New Testament (i.e. Christians only, in a new interpretation of the Old Testament). (Remembering that in Judaism Satan is, to this day, a faithful servant of God, not some countervailing presence that God cast out.)
Similarly, there is reason to believe that Lucifer and Satan are two entirely separate characters - Lucifer being a human king, whose arrogance led to the fall of Satan due to his rising against God story.


By the way, I once watched a documentary that said there is evidence that the harnessing of fire to cook food seems to have evolved pretty much everywhere in the world at about the same time - at a time when widespread travel did not seem to exist. I found that very interesting.

Was that due to an increase in protein in the diet, because we can eat cooked meat faster than raw meat?

One of the few true differences between dogs and wolves--two subspecies of the same species--is that dogs have smaller brains, an adaptation from a predator's diet to the lower-protein diet of a camp scavenger.

Perhaps their brains will get larger again over the next couple of thousand years, now that they're eating cooked meat too.:)
Or it could have been readily accessible protein from raw mollusks and bivalves.
Shell middens 125,000 years old have been found in Eritrea indicating the diet of early humans was sea food obtained by beachcombing as he followed the shore of the Red Sea south to Djibouti, where he could see land (present-day Yemen) across the Mandab Strait.

[zetetic0void]

"By the way, I once watched a documentary that said there is evidence that the harnessing of fire to cook food seems to have evolved pretty much everywhere in the world at about the same time - at a time when widespread travel did not seem to exist. I found that very interesting."

----------

This makes me think of the story where monkeys in one location started learning to wash the sand and grit off of potatoes they were given in sources of water.

According to the story, more and more monkeys in that group learned that behavior until apparently after a certain number learned it, those who learned it began to increase dramatically ... and this included monkeys on other islands in in non-connected locations

Hundredth Monkey phenomenon

w w w uhh.hawaii.edu/~ronald/HMP htm

---------

I am made to think about that physics experiment (I forget the name and exact details) where some particle was split into two particles which flew off in their own directions. They used some force to affect one of the resulting 2 particles and miraculously, the other apparently separated particle also was affected in a mirror fashion (my details may not be exact but the idea is similar).

It does make me wonder if there is some character within Reality we aren't quite aware of which causes some linkage which we at present have no idea exists (something which theoretically may cause such things as peculiar connections seen in many examples of twin humans for example)


------------
------------
------------

As for this thread ... the serpent can still be similar to Prometheus regardless of whether the serpent was or wasn't Satan or Lucifer (since the initial post was asking about the serpent and Prometheus). From what I've read, at least Lucifer seems to be something that was a late connection to being Satan.


Anyway, I have read from investigating about entheogenic mushrooms and plants old stories suggesting an ancient connection between snakes and useful herbs and plants. I still haven't figured out exactly what this is about. Were snakes seen to go to regions which just happened to be locations where herbs and plants useful to humans were located?

Is there a connection between this and the Greek's healing god Asclepius who had the staff with single snake coiled around it ( 'Rod of Asclepius' is still our medical symbol although more often than should occur, this is mistakenly shown as the double snake Caduceus of Hermes).

--------

In Indian Yoga, there is the Kundalini serpent visualized amongst the energy centres along the spine to the crown of the head
and in Egyptian symbology, the cobra was located at the forehead (third eye and possibly representing the effects of the pineal gland).


So I wonder about the connection of the snake to an idea of some sort of enlightenment. In my idea, Prometheus chained to the rocks with his liver being eaten every day is a lower stage where Heracles saving Prometheus on his 11th labour to get the Apples of Hesperides (in a 'blissful garden') represents the stages above this towards enlightenment (like nirvana, non-clinging to duality, etc)

[flameofanor5]

According to an 8th century BCE legend, Prometheus tricked Zeus by stuffing beef into the belly of an Ox and wrapping the bull horns in “glistening fat” to trick him into taking the inedible horns from an offering.
This pissed Zeus off and he hid fire from humans, but Prometheus stole it back and returned it to the humans.
In a later revision (700 BCE), Zeus stole “the means of life” from man and said, “you would easily do work enough in a day to supply you for a full year even without working; soon would you put away your rudder over the smoke, and the fields worked by ox and sturdy mule would run to waste.”
He also created Pandora (the first mortal woman) to punish man. She carried a jar with her which contained “evils, harsh pain and troublesome diseases which give men death”.

So, Zeus, angry with man disobeying him by the prodding of the trickster, punished man by causing man to toil in dry fields, and sent him disease and death.

Zeus also gave the trickster eternal punishment.

This sounds awfully familiar to me.
Is it just me?

All over the world, there are stories similar to the fall in the Garden of Eden, the Tower of Babel, and the flood. I am not surprised at all, but I do not think that this compromises the truth of the Bible. Which I believe is infallible.

[one_raven]

Hundredth Monkey phenomenon

w w w uhh.hawaii.edu/~ronald/HMP htm
I need to check that out.
Thanks

Were snakes seen to go to regions which just happened to be locations where herbs and plants useful to humans were located?
...
Is there a connection between this and the Greek's healing god Asclepius who had the staff with single snake coiled around it ( 'Rod of Asclepius' is still our medical symbol although more often than should occur, this is mistakenly shown as the double snake Caduceus of Hermes).
...
In Indian Yoga, there is the Kundalini serpent visualized amongst the energy centres along the spine to the crown of the head
and in Egyptian symbology, the cobra was located at the forehead (third eye and possibly representing the effects of the pineal gland).


So I wonder about the connection of the snake to an idea of some sort of enlightenment.

Interesting line of thought...

Here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=65570) I argue that the Biblical creation story could be an allegory for man grasping self-determination and here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=66859) I try to explore the apparent awakening of mankind at about 600 BCE.
These are steps toward self-realization and the death of Gods.

I have long wondered about the apparent correlations between the development of a person and the development of mankind - the Tanakh seeming to outline or trace or reflect both.

Born dependent upon those more powerful than you - learn - regognize the limitations of those you depend on and gain strength enough to rebel, while still remaining dependent - test yourself and those who care for you to find and push limits - break away fully - find your own way in the world and learn for yourself through experimentation, success and failure - find self-realization.

The creation story should seem very familiar to every parent.

I said in another discussion here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2358274#post2358274): (typos fixed)
Children get every need met by their parents. Food, shelter, love, language...
If a child has even reasonably apt parents, the child will see those parents as infallible providers and protectors and all-knowing sages.
At some point, a child will discover that those parents are just people.
Exactly when and how that happens will have a profound effect on the person.
Often times that happens at about the same time the child is becoming self-aware and gathering insecurities.
Insecurites, fears, self-awareness and recognition of mortality is a powerful mix and will drive many people to look for that one perfect thing - the rock to depend on in a shaky world.
With proof that mom and dad are just human like you, gods fill that void quite nicely.
Gods, for most people, can't disappoint you.

If you scrutinize them, they may.
If you are introduced to other points of view they may.
If you depend on them to readily they may.
When they do, who you have become up to that point in life will largely dictate what your response will be.

Perhaps to fully self-realize, we must kill our Gods.

[one_raven]

All over the world, there are stories similar to the fall in the Garden of Eden, the Tower of Babel, and the flood. I am not surprised at all, but I do not think that this compromises the truth of the Bible. Which I believe is infallible.

I am certain that The Bible takes stories from elsewhere - that does not necessarily imply that it is compromised at all.
A history book put out this year will include last year's history.

The earlier Sumerian deluge and creation myths/stories being echoed in The Bible don't suggest it is not true, it just implies that the Sumerians believed it before Abraham did and suggests where his beliefs came from (as he was Sumerian).

Calling The Bible infallible is rather silly, in my opinon, however, because there have been countless revisions and are currently many, many different versions.
It took hundred of years to even decide which books belong in The Bible and which do not. Not even everyone in First Ecumenical Council agreed - many of them argued that the Tanakh shouldn't even be included.
Which is infallible?
If the word of God and the words of the Prophets were infallible, we can't even be sure what they were because man is NOT infallible nor incorruptible.

[Pandaemoni]

Perhaps the serpent was a favorite avatar of Satan, one which was (for some reason) particulary appealing to women. By cursing the serpent and creating enmity between it and women, God takes away that tool and turns it into a symbol of evil.


I think the easier answer is that the whole story is allegorical (an dthe original authors really did not associate the snake with Satan, with it just being a later allegorical gloss. Again, it is a Jewish book, and they see Satan as a faithful servant. If the whole story is allegory, than adding a new allegory to it by introducing the Christian character of Satan isn't at all invalid.

It's only when you interpret it literally that the snake's "real identity" takes on any importance.

I do like the part about creating enmity between snakes and women, as I can easily imagine the original author struggling to come up with a reason women are so afraid of snakes. It's an interesting aside into the territory of ancient sexism.

[one_raven]

Maybe just take the Freudian angle and say that the women was enchanted by the power of the serpent (phallus), so she grasped for it to try and orchestrate her rise to power at the expense of man's fall, but the patriarch God saw through this ruse and punished her by keeping the phallus ever out of her reach (and Lacan would add that the phallus was also kept from man's reach, because he was proven to not be a worthy guardian, but the patriarch allowed him to think he had it (which is why he gave man a penis (they could not conceive before the punishment, remember?)) to keep the sexes at constant odds with each other) and to this day, man is the boss of woman because they both believe he has the power of the phallus, when the real boss is the serpent (man and woman's evil obsession with power).

:D

[flameofanor5]

I am certain that The Bible takes stories from elsewhere - that does not necessarily imply that it is compromised at all.
A history book put out this year will include last year's history.

The earlier Sumerian deluge and creation myths/stories being echoed in The Bible don't suggest it is not true, it just implies that the Sumerians believed it before Abraham did and suggests where his beliefs came from (as he was Sumerian).

Calling The Bible infallible is rather silly, in my opinon, however, because there have been countless revisions and are currently many, many different versions.
It took hundred of years to even decide which books belong in The Bible and which do not. Not even everyone in First Ecumenical Council agreed - many of them argued that the Tanakh shouldn't even be included.
Which is infallible?
If the word of God and the words of the Prophets were infallible, we can't even be sure what they were because man is NOT infallible nor incorruptible.

Yes, I do believe the Bible contains stories previously written down. Although I still do believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God. Written down by man, but inspired by God. I'm almost sure you think I'm a fool for this. Then again I'm sure a lot of the people on this forum think that I'm an idiot.

[one_raven]

Although I still do believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God. Written down by man, but inspired by God.

The question is which Bible?
Which revision of which version?
What about the Apocrypha?
Who is it that should decide which books belong?
Are you Christian? If so, I assume you must believe that Jesus was the last prophet (unless you are LDS, of course). Am I correct? If that's the case, what mortal man has the insight to decide what should and should not be a part of The Bible? Most (if not all) of what is generally considered "The New Testament" did not even exist until after Jesus' death. Are you saying that God spoke to the apostles? If so, Jesus was not the last prophet, was he?

Do you realize that "The Bible" is not only not a book (it's a collection of writings, letters and accounts) but it is not even agreed which of these writings, letters and accounts belong as part of this collection?
Even within the Catholic Church - who decided upon the first Bible - it was not agreed which of these writings should be included in the collection.

I don't think you are an idiot for believing that The Bible is the word of God, but I think you are foolish if you believe that without even knowing what The Bibe is and the history of it. Without investigating the failings of man, to take his words as gospel is painfully foolish.

[zetetic0void]

Something I think about in relation to the story of the Garden of Eden is that 'woman' was shown as the one who was more directly (ie, initially) involved with the Fruit of Knowledge (I still think it is knowledge and not just of good and evil ... but that's another debate).

---------------------------------
Women's role in language/ writing?
---------------------------------
It is said that within early human groups, females worked in groups and gathered plants, herbs and other needed things (probably insects too). In that environment, they communicated with each other as they worked whereas males were off trying to hunt for animals and no doubt not vocalizing as much with each other as this would cause animals to detect them.


Anyway, the idea that women had more to do with originating language or refining language is something I have read about.


------------------------
Egyptian Seshat as Eve?
------------------------

One of the oldest Egyptian goddesses was Seshat. She was the goddess of knowledge wisdom, and writing and was a record keeper and scribe and was said to have invented writing.

Perhaps this is based on the hidden realization that women had more of a hand in refining communication and possibly more to do with writing very early on in humanity.


So is the fact (within the confines of that story which in my opinion is symbolic and not historical) that Eve is the first one involved in humans' reception of knowledge (the fruit) a signal of the actual historical role from tens of thousands of years past? *


h t t p : // en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seshat


My post is a bit off topic as it appears to have nothing to do with Prometheus.

---------------

* (personally, I have some feelings that humanity and complex civilization may go back a lot further than what is generally believed. Some main points are the seemingly rain-water induced weathering on the sides of the Sphinx in Egypt meaning that was actually before 10500 BC. In my opinion, there appears to be signs from many cultures of an intense flood - although I do not know yet whether those were unrelated local situations or referring to a massive world-wide occurrence - and possibly sign of a cometary impact that destroyed previous advanced civilization [I also have a hunch that the general historical feeling of seeing comets as bad omens may stem to an almost forgotten cultural remembrance of a catastrophe, but that's just a guess]. Whether any symbols of women as being involved with writing and recording knowledge stem from the newer situation after such catastrophe or far before in the very distant past before the rise of previous advanced civilizations which also had that in their myths , I do not know.)

[one_raven]

Something I think about in relation to the story of the Garden of Eden is that 'woman' was shown as the one who was more directly (ie, initially) involved with the Fruit of Knowledge (I still think it is knowledge and not just of good and evil ... but that's another debate).

This is about the creation stories.
What makes you think that?
Is there any evidence pointing to that, or is it just a hunch/desire for it to be true?

[zetetic0void]

This is about the creation stories.
What makes you think that?
Is there any evidence pointing to that, or is it just a hunch/desire for it to be true?

What I meant was that in the story it is Eve who is first is intruduced to the Fruit of Knowledge (of 'good and evil' ... or of 'both good and evil' and inclusive of all things from their extremes and all shades between ... so basically of just 'knowledge' ... depending on how you think that should be interpreted).

So perhaps what I said wasn't clear because what you quoted was just relating how the story of Eden says Eve was the first who encountered the Fruit.


So if the Fruit is knowledge (which I see Prometheus's fire as being a symbol of), then having her encounter it first could symbolize the general idea (or a vague cultural rememberance) of women being more connected with originating language and writing.

[one_raven]

What I meant was that in the story it is Eve who is first is intruduced to the Fruit of Knowledge (of 'good and evil' ... or of 'both good and evil' and inclusive of all things from their extremes and all shades between ... so basically of just 'knowledge' ... depending on how you think that should be interpreted).

Hmmm...
I'm not so sure about that.
It seems to me that eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil would be them determining for themselves what is right and wrong - determining their own morality.
God's response to them seems to be to be one of, "OK, you don't need me anymore to tell you what to do? You can decide for yourself? Go out in the world and make it on your own then."

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=65570

[Medicine*Woman]

I think the easier answer is that the whole story is allegorical (an dthe original authors really did not associate the snake with Satan, with it just being a later allegorical gloss. Again, it is a Jewish book, and they see Satan as a faithful servant. If the whole story is allegory, than adding a new allegory to it by introducing the Christian character of Satan isn't at all invalid.

It's only when you interpret it literally that the snake's "real identity" takes on any importance.

I do like the part about creating enmity between snakes and women, as I can easily imagine the original author struggling to come up with a reason women are so afraid of snakes. It's an interesting aside into the territory of ancient sexism.
*************
M*W: Allegory? Yes. It is even allegory of allegory of allegory, and the allegories become confused to say the least, because they represent many different characters of myth.

The ancients associated serpents with women (goddessi), because of the serpent's alleged healing powers from the shedding of it's skin bringing a "new birth." And women, of course, are associated with birth.

It is my belief that the idea of the "original" serpent, you know, the one in the "Garden," etc., etc., (which I believe represents the zodiac), was taken from the Constellation Serpens.

According to Ian Ridpath: "In mythology, Ophiuchus was identified as the healer Asclepius, son of Apollo, although why he appears to be wrestling with a serpent in the sky is not fully explained. His connection with snakes is attributed to the story that he once killed a snake that was miraculously restored to life by a herb placed on it by another snake. Asclepius subsequently used the same technique to revive dead people. Snakes are the symbol of rebirth because they shed their skins every year."

"The Serpent Holder is actually two constellations: 1) the Serpent-Holder itself surrounded on both sides by 2) the Serpent (whose head is to the left of the Serpent Holder and is called Serpens Caput, and whose tail is to the right of the Serpent Holder, Serpens Cauda). Originally, however, the two constellations were conceived of as a single unit."

Allen says: “Of the four stellar Snakes this preeminently is the Serpent, its stars originally being combined with those of Ophiuchus, ... but it now is catalogued separately, and occasionally divided into Caput and Cauda on either side of the Serpent-holder.”

"The Serpent-Holder constellation is one of the largest, if not the most vast one, in the night sky. Perhaps it was one of the most important. If one finds it in the sky, the Serpent-Holder looks overwhelming. A further key to its importance may be its position in the night sky, for it looks as though it could be part of the zodiac."

"As stated elsewhere, the zodiac has been considered important, because the sun and planets (seem to) travel through the constellations of the zodiac, and knowledge of when certain constellations would appear on the horizon at specific times of the year provided a "calendar" by which agricultural peoples could determine planting, harvesting, etc.."

"In addition, and related to this fact, watching the sky was, in an earlier form, an important religion among certain peoples in prehistory, concerned with the zodiacal constellations, as well as the sun, planets, and moon which (from earth seem to) travel through them. Present-day astrology is a remnant of just such religions."

Rey states: "An odd thing about the Serpent-Holder is that it reaches into the zodiac, yet is not by tradition counted among the zodiacal figures, possibly because there would then be 13 constellations instead of 12." This information is extremely interesting, especially because if one looks at the ecliptic, the imaginary line through which the zodiac figures go, one finds that Aries the Ram (which is part of the zodiac) does not have even one star reaching across that line, whereas the Serpent-Holder's leg very definitely does."

"Might the Serpent-Holder not have been a 'member' of the zodiac at one time? And why would 13 constellations have been so bad? (Twelve constellations, or twelve zodiac signs, represent the twelve-month calendar, but the twelve-month calendar is not set in stone.) There are other things to consider as well about this whole problem. At one time Libra, the Scales, and Scorpio, the Scorpion, were part of one constellation, so if the Serpent Holder was in the zodiac at that time, there could still have been twelve constellations comprising the zodiac."

Barbara Walker, in her encyclopedia says: "'Eve' in Hebrew was "YHWH, yod-he-vau-he, ... from the Hebrew root HWH, meaning both 'life' and 'woman'--in Latin letters, E-V-E. With the addition of a Y (yod), it amounted to the Goddess's invocation of her own name as the Word of creation, a common idea in Egypt and other ancient lands" (288). She would thus be saying, "I, Eve," YHWH."

According to Walker, the Hebrew YHWH means 'Eve,' 'life,' and 'woman.'
According to Howey the Arabic means 'life' and 'serpent,' and in the name 'Aesculapius' are contained the concepts 'Serpent' and 'Teacher.'
Further, under 'Serpent' Walker states: "Gnostic accounts of the Eden myth used the Aramaic pun identifying Eve, the Teacher, and the Serpent: Hawah, Mother of All Living; hawa, to instruct; and hewya, Serpent. Eve's name in Arabic still combines the idea of 'life' hayyat with the name of the serpent (Hayyat)."

M*W wonders if the symbolism of the missing 13th constellation could have been the one signifying that one which was 'cast out of the Garden' (zodiac)? Could the various allegories of the constellations have been viewed in new ways by later cultures, therefore, causing all the confusion we have about it today? Who was right? Well, let's say they all were. The vision is really in the eye of the beholder, and they all gave us great myths. What we need to remember is that's what they are... myths. We need to enjoy them for what they were and still are (ancient entertainment), and not try to validate them as religious fact.

References:

Allen, Richard Hinckley: Star Names and Their Meanings. "Many theories have been propounded for the birthplace and time of formation of this; but there now seems to be general agreement of opinion that..." (more) (I'll provide a proper citation for this later.~M*W).

Howey, M. Oldfield: The Horse in Magic and Myth: A rich compilation of legend and lore from classical mythology, the Bible... ISBN13: 9780486421179 (Sorry, but I couldn't find biblio details).

H. A. Rey. Find the Constellations. Houghton Mifflin, 1954. Several revised editions, most recent edition in 1988.

Ian Ridpath and Wil Tirion (2007). Stars and Planets Guide, Collins, London. ISBN 978-0007251209. Princeton University Press, Princeton. ISBN 978-0691135564.

Walker, Barbara: The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1983.

[Medicine*Woman]

Maybe just take the Freudian angle and say that the women was enchanted by the power of the serpent (phallus), so she grasped for it to try and orchestrate her rise to power at the expense of man's fall, but the patriarch God saw through this ruse and punished her by keeping the phallus ever out of her reach (and Lacan would add that the phallus was also kept from man's reach, because he was proven to not be a worthy guardian, but the patriarch allowed him to think he had it (which is why he gave man a penis (they could not conceive before the punishment, remember?)) to keep the sexes at constant odds with each other) and to this day, man is the boss of woman because they both believe he has the power of the phallus, when the real boss is the serpent (man and woman's evil obsession with power).

:D
*************
M*W: Ah, the old penis envy theme. Good try, but I think it was the other way around. Man is borne of woman and forever tries to get back in there (one way or the other).

[ScaryMonster]

It is interesting that the eagle sent daily to torment the chained Prometheus was eating his liver.

The spear which was jabbed at the side of Christ on the cross appears in paintings and images I've seen to be piercing the body at around the same spot ... the area of the liver.

I wonder what the liver symbolized to the ancients.

-----------

There is a symbol often seen within Christianity of the snake on the cross. I'm not an expert on this but it surely is a very interesting symbol.

"The liver is the only internal human organ capable of natural regeneration of lost tissue; as little as 25% of a liver can regenerate into a whole liver. A human liver is known to grow back in no less than 8 years, due to hyptochronatin cells in the remaining liver" from Wiki

This is a medical fact; you can see connection to resurrection! The question is did the ancient Greeks know about this biological process?

[zetetic0void]

"This is a medical fact; you can see connection to resurrection! The question is did the ancient Greeks know about this biological process?"
----------

I had read that some ancient peoples (Greeks, Romans, maybe older than the Greeks too) knew about this and possibly due to the fact that soldiers got serious injuries involving such things. Observation that the liver regrew might have stemmed from that.

-----------------

It is interesting that Prometheus is having his liver eaten by an eagle and the story of Christ had the spear stuck in what appears to be that region (at least on images I've seen). I wonder if there are older stories from older mythology that has similar connection. It could be a general idea that becomes imbedded in various forms of a similar symbolic story over time.


I've seen alchemical diagrams of the body assigning symbolic characteristics to parts of the body. Perhaps there are some clues to be found in such symbolic avenues.


The feeling of heat (from what I feel) appears to be centred around the solar plexus region and from diagrams I've seen the liver covers this region whereas the heart is further above. Perhaps peoples associated the liver with that heat and energy.