The Fall in the Tripartite Tractate

The Logos in the Tripartite Tractate

The Tripartite Tractate view of the Fall

# **The Tripartite Tractate View of the Fall**  

## **The Logos and the Fall**  

The *Tripartite Tractate* presents a distinct perspective on the Fall, attributing it not to Sophia but to the Logos. This sets it apart from other Gnostic traditions, which often describe the Fall as originating from Sophia's misguided desire. Instead, the *Tripartite Tractate* portrays the Logos as the Aeon responsible for the disordered creation and subsequent fall.  

### **The Fall in the Tripartite Tractate**  

The *Tripartite Tractate* describes how the Logos acted outside of his proper bounds, leading to the disorder and fragmentation of creation:  

> "The intent, then, of the Logos, who is this one, was good. When he had come forth, he gave glory to the Father, even if it led to something beyond possibility, since he had wanted to bring forth one who is perfect, from an agreement in which he had not been, and without having the command.  

> This aeon was last to have <been> brought forth by mutual assistance, and he was small in magnitude. And before he begot anything else for the glory of the will and in agreement with the Totalities, he acted, magnanimously, from an abundant love, and set out toward that which surrounds the perfect glory, for it was not without the will of the Father that the Logos was produced, which is to say, not without it will he go forth." (*Tripartite Tractate* 100.21-30)  

The Logos, attempting to bring forth perfection without proper authorization, initiated a process that resulted in disorder. The text continues:  

> "For, he was not able to bear the sight of the light, but he looked into the depth and he doubted. Out of this there was a division—he became deeply troubled—and a turning away because of his self-doubt and division, forgetfulness and ignorance of himself and <of that> which is." (*Tripartite Tractate* 100.21-30)  

This passage directly links the Fall to the Logos, depicting his doubt and ignorance as the cause of division and fragmentation in creation.  

### **Irenaeus on Sophia and the Fall**  

In contrast, Irenaeus rejects the idea that Sophia, as an Aeon of Wisdom, could experience ignorance and passion:  

> “How can it be regarded as otherwise ridiculous, that (wisdom) was involved in ignorance, corruption, and passion? For these things are alien and contrary to wisdom, nor can they ever be qualities belonging to it. For wherever there is a lack of anything beneficial and an ignorance of knowledge, there wisdom does not exist.” (*Against Heresies* 1.2.2)  

Irenaeus argues that Wisdom (Sophia) cannot suffer from ignorance, reinforcing the *Tripartite Tractate’s* perspective that the Fall was not Sophia’s doing but rather the consequence of the Logos’ misguided action.  

### **The Logos in Biblical Usage**  

The Greek term *logos* (λόγος) has a variety of meanings in Scripture, including:  

- **Reason, thought, or account** (*Matthew 22:15*, *Luke 16:2*).  

- **A decree or order** (*Acts 19:40*).  

- **Divine expression (John 1:1-3)*.  

For instance, in *John 1:1-3*:  

> “In the beginning was the Word (*Logos*), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Through him all things were made; without him, nothing was made that has been made.”  

The *Tripartite Tractate* differentiates between the divine Logos of John and the Logos responsible for the Fall, showing that *logos* can be used generically for Aeons rather than referring solely to the Son of God.  

### **The Fall and Adam in Scripture**  

In contrast to the Gnostic Sophia myth, the Bible attributes the Fall to Adam rather than Eve:  

> “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.” (*Romans 5:12*)  

Eve was deceived, but Adam willingly disobeyed (*1 Timothy 2:13-14*), much like the Logos in the *Tripartite Tractate*. The Fall, then, is a result of deliberate action, not of ignorance or accident.  

### **The Logos and the Demiurge in Valentinian Thought**  

Valentinian teacher Heracleon viewed the Demiurge positively, describing him as the agent of the Logos in creation:  

> “All things were made through Him," means that it was the Word who caused the Craftsman (Demiurge) to make the world, that is it was not the Word 'from whom' or 'by whom,' but the one 'through whom (all things were made).'” (*Heracleon on John 1:3*, *Commentary on John*)  

This aligns with the *Tripartite Tractate*, which describes the Logos as the organizing force behind the cosmos.  

### **Conclusion**  

The *Tripartite Tractate* offers a unique perspective on the Fall, attributing it to the Logos rather than Sophia. This differs from other Valentinian texts and Gnostic traditions that place responsibility on Sophia. The text portrays the Logos as acting beyond his limits, leading to disorder, a view supported by Irenaeus’ rejection of Sophia’s involvement in ignorance. Additionally, the Logos’ role aligns with biblical teachings on Adam’s responsibility for sin. Heracleon’s description of the Demiurge further reinforces that the *Tripartite Tractate’s* Logos is not identical with the divine *Logos* in *John 1:1-3*, but a distinct Aeon who caused creation’s fragmentation.

First a quote from the Tripartite Tractate

The intent, then, of the Logos, who is this one, was good. When he had come forth, he gave glory to the Father, even if it led to something beyond possibility, since he had wanted to bring forth one who is perfect, from an agreement in which he had not been, and without having the command.
This aeon was last to have <been> brought forth by mutual assistance, and he was small in magnitude. And before he begot anything else for the glory of the will and in agreement with the Totalities, he acted, magnanimously, from an abundant love, and set out toward that which surrounds the perfect glory, for it was not without the will of the Father that the Logos was produced, which is to say, not without it will he go forth. But he, the Father, had brought him forth for those about whom he knew that it was fitting that they should come into being.
The Father and the Totalities drew away from him, so that the limit which the Father had set might be established - for it is not from grasping the incomprehensibility but by the will of the Father, - and furthermore, (they withdrew) so that the things which have come to be might become an organization which would come into being. If it were to come, it would not come into being by the manifestation of the Pleroma. Therefore, it is not fitting to criticize the movement which is the Logos, but it is fitting that we should say about the movement of the Logos that it is a cause of an organization which has been destined to come about.
The Logos himself caused it to happen, being complete and unitary, for the glory of the Father, whom he desired, and (he did so) being content with it, but those whom he wished to take hold of firmly he begot in shadows and copies and likenesses. For, he was not able to bear the sight of the light, but he looked into the depth and he doubted. Out of this there was a division - he became deeply troubled - and a turning away because of his self-doubt and division, forgetfulness and ignorance of himself and <of that> which is.

What does Irenaeus say about the Fall of Sophia

Irenaeus against heresies: How can it be regarded as otherwise ridiculous, that (wisdom) was involved in ignorance, corruption, and passion? For these things are alien and contrary to wisdom, nor can they ever be qualities belonging to it. For wherever there is a lack of any thing beneficial and an ignorance of knowledge, there wisdom does not exist. Let them therefore no longer call this suffering Aeon, Sophia, but let them give up either her name or her sufferings. And let them, moreover, not call their entire Pleroma spiritual, if this Aeon had a place within it when she was involved in such a tumult of passion. For even a vigorous soul, not to say a spiritual substance, would not pass through any such experience.
the tripartite tractate contens an early form of Christian Gnosticism which differs complets from other Gnostic texts when it comes to the Fall

Now let's a look at the bible's use of Logos 

3056 λόγος logos log’-os 

some of the meanings of the word 

 its use as respect to the MIND alone 
2a) reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating 
2b) account, i.e. regard, consideration 
2c) account, i.e. reckoning, score its use as respect to the MIND alone 
2a) reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating 
2b) account, i.e. regard, consideration 
2c) account, i.e. reckoning, score

decree, mandate or order reason, cause, ground, 


Mt 5:32  But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause <3056> of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Mt 22:15  Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk <3056>.

Lu 16:2  And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account <3056> of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

60 ¶  Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying <3056>; who can hear it?
66  From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Act 19:40  For we are in danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account <3056> of this concourse.

Looking at these Bible quotes we can see that there are many uses of the word logos not all of them referring to the divine logos

The tripartite tractate associate the fall with logos and not with Sophia.  In fact, the fallen aeon is not called Sophia at all, but simply a logos, or word (logos being used as a generic name for the aeons).

I've always felt it wrong that sophia (wisdom) in Gnosticism is the bad guy that created sin that's just really absurd and it complete doesn't make any sense at all

In the Bible Eve is not responsible for sin Adam is, we see this in Paul’s statement at Romans 5:12-19, which places the responsibility for sin upon Adam. Compare tripartite tractate 107.20–108.12

“And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.”

This gives no indication that Eve deceived Adam or seduced him into eating.  In fact, Adam is partially blaming God for the woman's presence.  At the same time he was trying to place the responsibility on Eve for HIS disobedience.  Yet there is NOT ONE accusation against Eve throughout the scriptures, except to state that she, being deceived, was in the transgression (1 Timothy 2:13-15 “For Adam was First formed, then Eve.  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.  Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”)

Eve was deceived by the Serpent, but “Adam was not deceived,” says the apostle Paul. (1Tim 2:14) With full knowledge Adam willfully and deliberately chose to disobey and then as a criminal he tried to hide. When brought to trial, instead of showing sorrow or regret or asking for forgiveness, Adam attempted to justify himself and pass the responsibility off on others, even blaming God for his own willful sin. “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree and so I ate.” (Gem 3:7-12)

Tri. Trac. 107.20–108.12: This is the expulsion which was made for him, when he was expelled from the enjoyments of the things which belong to the likeness and those of the representation. It was a work of providence, so that it might be found that it is a short time until man will receive the enjoyment of the things which are eternally good, in which is the place of rest. This the spirit ordained when he first planned that man should experience the great evil, which is death, that is complete ignorance of the Totality, and that he should experience all the evils which come from this and, after the deprivations and cares which are in these, that he should receive of the greatest good, which is life eternal, that is, firm knowledge of the Totalities and the reception of all good things. Because of the transgression of the first man, death ruled. (Romans 5:17) It was accustomed to slay every man in the manifestation of its domination, which had been given it as a kingdom because of the organization of the Father's will, of which we spoke previously.

Therefore since sin came by one man it stands to reason that Sophia is not responsible for the fall the Logos is

The account in the Gospel of Truth is also extrememly relevant here. The opening paragraphs of the Gospel of Truth describe the Fall. It contains no explicit references to mythological figures familiar from other Valentinian texts (e.g. Sophia, the demiurge, etc.). However, these passages do refer to a semi-personified "error."

Both Error and Logos fail in their quest to find the Father.

"He is the lord of all of them, that is, the countenance which the logos (i.e. Error) brought forth in his thought as a representation of the Father of the Totalities. Therefore, he is adorned with every name which is a representation of him, since he is characterized by every property and glorious quality. For he too is called 'father' and 'god' and 'demiurge' and 'king' and 'judge' and 'place' and 'dwelling' and 'law'" (Tripartite Tractate 100:21-30).


Ptolemy interprets the same passage in terms of the Aeons in the Fullness (pleroma) in his Commentary on the Prologue of John quoted in Irenaeus Against Heresies1:8:5 (cf also Excerpts of Theodotus 6:4). In this case, Ptolemy interprets the passage to refer to the Aeon Word (logos) who, along with his partner Life (zoe), is the one who is responsible for the creation of all subsequent Aeons

Heracleon a Valentinian teacher describes the the demiurge in relatively positive terms as the logos's agent and hence ultimately the Father's agent in creation 

Fragments from a Commentary on the Gospel of John by Heracleon Fragment 1, on John 1:3 (In John 1:3, “All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made.”) The sentence: "All things were made through him" means the world and what is in it. It excludes what is better than the world. The Aeon (i.e. the Fullness), and the things in it, were not made by the Word; they came into existence before the Word. . . “Without him, nothing was made” of what is in the world and the creation. . . "All things were made through Him," means that it was the Word who caused the Craftsman (Demiurge) to make the world, that is it was not the Word “from whom” or “by whom,” but the one “through whom (all things were made).”. . . It was not the Word who made all things, as if he were energized by another, for "through whom" means that another made them and the Word provided the energy. 

The Father the single One created the universe 52.4-6 It is, then, only the Father and God in the proper sense that no one else begot. As for the Totalities, he is the one who begot them and created them. He is without beginning and without end.

However, the perpetuation of the cosmos through the creation of physical bodies is accomplished through the logos



Now this Logos is different than the Son. or this first thought in the tripartite tractate
the Gospel of John the logos and the Son of God are one and the same

The point made may be a distinction between the logos as willed by the Father and as originating in him, cf. 75:23-24.

Gnostic Teaching On The Serpent

Gnostic Teaching On The Serpent

Serpent: There exist two distinct Gnostic interpretations concerning the serpent in the Genesis narrative. The Ophites and the Naasenes, both sects within Gnosticism, held the serpent in reverence. Conversely, when we examine the Nag Hammadi Scriptures, we encounter a Gnostic interpretation that aligns more closely with the traditional biblical understanding.

Note 

The names Ophites and Naassenes, both derived from words for serpent or snake, are used to refer to Gnostic sects. 

The Naassenes sect whose name derives from nahash, Hebrew for "serpent."
The Ophites are Gnostics given a similar name, from ophis, Greek for "serpent." 

The *Apocryphon of John* presents a striking reinterpretation of the Genesis narrative, particularly in its depiction of the serpent. Unlike some Gnostic texts that view the serpent as a liberating figure, this text aligns the serpent with Yaldabaoth, the ignorant and oppressive creator. The serpent does not merely offer knowledge but plays a role in subjecting humanity to sexual desire and reproduction, which are portrayed as consequences of Yaldabaoth’s dominion. This perspective redefines the serpent’s role and challenges traditional interpretations of the Edenic fall.  

The passage in the *Apocryphon of John* states:  

 "However, I caused them to eat.  

I asked the Savior, ‘Lord, isn’t it the serpent who caused Adam to eat?’ He smiled and replied, ‘The serpent caused them to eat in order to produce the wickedness of the desire to reproduce that would make Adam helpful to him.’"  

This passage suggests a dual perspective on the act of eating. On the one hand, Jesus, as the revealer of hidden truths, claims responsibility for causing Adam and Eve to eat, which may be understood as an allusion to the faculty of *Epinoia*, the divine insight that enables humanity to awaken from its sleep of ignorance and come to the knowledge of the Unknown Father. On the other hand, the serpent’s role is explicitly linked to the introduction of sexual reproduction, a theme central to Gnostic cosmology.  

Jesus and Epinoia – Jesus, who occasionally appears as the narrator, is said to have caused Adam to eat. This refers to his role in awakening Adam’s Epinoia (thought or insight), which was embedded within him by the divine realm. In this sense, Jesus' involvement differs from the serpent’s role in Genesis. The serpent in the *Apocryphon of John* is not the bringer of true knowledge but a catalyst for human entrapment in the physical world.

### The Serpent’s Role in the Fall  

Unlike the traditional interpretation in Genesis, where the serpent is a deceiver who tempts Eve into disobedience, the *Apocryphon of John* portrays the serpent as a means through which Yaldabaoth enforces reproduction upon humanity. The text clarifies:  

 "The serpent here takes on a new role: it brings about the consequences of eating from the tree, as set out in Genesis 3:16. According to Moses, childbearing and sexual desire are in accordance with God’s orders, but here these things are forced upon people (represented by Adam) by Yaldabaoth (represented by the serpent)."  

This interpretation presents sexual reproduction as an imposed condition rather than a natural aspect of creation. In Genesis, childbirth and sexual desire are framed as part of God’s punishment after the Fall:  

 "To the woman he said, ‘I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.’" (Genesis 3:16, NIV)  

However, in the *Apocryphon of John*, these consequences are not seen as divine punishment but as part of Yaldabaoth’s scheme to perpetuate the material world. The serpent, rather than acting independently, is a mechanism through which Yaldabaoth ensures the continuation of the human race under his dominion.  

### The Gnostic Rejection of the Serpent as a Liberator  

Some Gnostic traditions, particularly Sethian texts, present the serpent as a positive figure, a revealer of knowledge who helps humanity awaken to its divine origins. However, the *Apocryphon of John* does not adopt this perspective. Instead, the serpent is depicted negatively, reinforcing the control of Yaldabaoth over humanity.  

"The *Apocryphon of John* presents the serpent in a complex role. While it facilitates the act of eating from the tree—an act associated with knowledge—it ultimately serves Yaldabaoth’s purpose by bringing about the consequences described in Genesis 3:16. Unlike in Moses' account, where childbearing and sexual desire are part of God's design, here they are imposed on humanity by Yaldabaoth, with the serpent playing a role in that process. Though the serpent’s actions lead to knowledge, they also ensure humanity’s continued entrapment in the material world.)"  

The Serpent as an Agent of Yaldabaoth – Unlike Genesis, where the serpent’s actions are ambiguous and open to interpretation, here the serpent serves Yaldabaoth’s agenda. The eating from the tree leads not to enlightenment but to the introduction of “the wickedness of the desire to reproduce.” This suggests that Yaldabaoth, through the serpent, forces humanity into the cycle of physical birth and death. This interpretation contrasts with the mainstream biblical view in which childbirth and sexual desire are seen as divinely ordained rather than as mechanisms of enslavement.  

This clarification distances the *Apocryphon of John* from other Gnostic interpretations

Valentinians

The Valentinans understanding of the Serpent comes from the book of Genesis  

The first human being is a mixed formation, and a mixed creation, and a deposit of those of the left and those of the right, and a spiritual word whose attention is divided between each of the two substances from which he takes his being. Therefore, it is said that a paradise was planted for him, so that he might eat of the food of three kinds of tree, since it is a garden of the threefold order, and since it is that which gives enjoyment.

The noble elect substance which is in him was more exalted. It created and it did not wound them. Therefore they issued a command, making a threat and bringing upon him a great danger, which is death. Only the enjoyment of the things which are evil did he allow him to taste, and from the other tree with the double (fruit) he did not allow him to eat, much less from the tree of life, so that they would not acquire honor [...] them, and so that they would not be [...] by the evil power which is called "the serpent." And he is more cunning than all the evil powers. He led man astray through the determination of those things which belong to the thought and the desires. <He> made him transgress the command, so that he would die. And he was expelled from every enjoyment of that place. (the Tripartite Tractate)

In the text from the Tripartite Tractate we have two different groups the first human, the other group the evil powers, the serpent is one of the evil powers "by the evil power which is called "the serpent." And he is more cunning than all the evil powers."

Here in the Tripartite Tractate the Serpent is given the standard biblical interpretation it actually led Adam and Eve to sin, introducing death’s control over humankind

In the Tripartite Tractate the serpent is the agent of the carnal powers, material passions, which through their seduction of man force him to suffer the conditions of their own, corporeal existence

The hyllc ruler represents the power which keeps the chaotic activities of the hylic powers in check: cf. 97:36-98:5, 99:9-11.15-16.

Note that this figure, the chief of the hylic powers, is not regarded as essentially a chaotic and evil power; on the contrary his function is positive, since he is a tool employed by the superior powers to give shape to the realm of matter

The Serpent is Symbolic 

The Serpent symbolic of the impulses of the flesh

serpent--Sense consciousness or the desire of carnal mind for pleasure. He seeks satisfaction through the appetite. By listening to the serpent of sense, man falls to his lowest estate.

The serpent in the garden should be understood symbolically this can be seen from the works of Philo of Alexandria:

And these statements appear to me to be dictated by a philosophy which is symbolical rather than strictly accurate. For no trees of life or of knowledge have ever at any previous time appeared upon the earth, nor is it likely that any will appear hereafter. (Philo of Alexandria On the Creation of the world)

that the aforesaid serpent is the symbol of pleasure, because in the first place he is destitute of feet, and crawls on his belly with his face downwards. In the second place, because he uses lumps of clay for food. Thirdly, because he bears poison in his teeth, by which it is his nature to kill those who are bitten by him. (Philo of Alexandria On the Creation of the world)

The testimony of Truth

It is written in the Law concerning this, when God gave a command to Adam, "From every tree you may eat, but from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise do not eat, for on the day that you eat from it, you will surely die." But the serpent was wiser than all the animals that were in Paradise, and he persuaded Eve, saying, "On the day when you eat from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise, the eyes of your mind will be opened." And Eve obeyed, and she stretched forth her hand; she took from the tree and ate; she also gave to her husband with her. And immediately they knew that they were naked, and they took some fig-leaves (and) put them on as girdles. But God came at the time of evening, walking in the midst of Paradise. When Adam saw him, he hid himself. And he said, "Adam, where are you?" He answered (and) said, "I have come under the fig tree." And at that very moment, God knew that he had eaten from the tree of which he had commanded him, "Do not eat of it." And he said to him, "Who is it who has instructed you?" And Adam answered, "The woman whom you have given me." And the woman said, "It is the serpent who instructed me." And he (God) cursed the serpent, and called him "devil." And he said, "Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing evil and good." Then he said, "Let us cast him out of paradise, lest he take from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever." (The Testimony of Truth)

And in one place, Moses writes, "He made the devil a serpent <for> those whom he has in his generation." Also, in the book which is called "Exodus," it is written thus: "He contended against the magicians, when the place was full of serpents according to their wickedness; and the rod which was in the hand of Moses became a serpent, (and) it swallowed the serpents of the magicians." Again it is written (Nm 21:9), "He made a serpent of bronze (and) hung it upon a pole ...... (1 line unrecoverable)... which [...] for the one who will gaze upon this bronze serpent, none will destroy him, and the one who will believe in this bronze serpent will be saved." For this is Christ; those who believed in him have received life. Those who did not believe will die. (The Testimony of Truth)

The "serpent" of the garden of Eden is sense consciousness. It may also be called desire, and pleasure (sin), or the activity of life in an external expression, apart from the Source of life. When the life is lifted to the realization that it is Spirit, it becomes healing, as illustrated by Moses' lifting up the serpent in the wilderness. Those who had been bitten by the fiery serpents (lustful expressions of life) were healed when they looked upon the serpent that was lifted up by Moses at the command of God. They looked up, or perceived the truth about divine life, and their minds and bodies were cleansed

VERSE8 And Yahweh said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent" — In appearance, this brazen serpent looked like those on the ground, but it lacked their poisonous venom. In Hebrew, the word "serpent" does not appear in this verse, only the word saraph. Saraph sigifies to consume by burning. The verb is frequently used for complete and utter burning (Exod. 12:10; 29:14; Lev. 4:19,21; 8:32 etc.), particularly in sacrifice when the flesh was consumed by fire. Hence the serpent on the pole represented flesh purified, having gone through the fire, whereas the serpents on the ground represented the flesh in active sin. Yahweh provided a saraph of copper to heal the deadly infection caused by the venom of the fiery serpents. The Scriptures say of the Lord: "With his stripes we are healed . . . Yahweh laid on him the iniquity of us all" vIsa. 53:5-6; 2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 8:3). Flesh purified will conquer the undiscipled world eventually (Isa. 6:6-7), hence the reference to the Seraphim in Scripture (Isa. 6:2; Rev. 4:8). The brazen serpent typed the sacrifice of the Lord, as he declared:"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:14-15. See also John 12:32,33). Christ came in "the likeness of sinful flesh" (Rom. 8:3), but he conquered its power. The brazen serpent on the pole, therefore, represented flesh crucified. It testified to the Israelites that they had to figuratively crucify the flesh if they would be saved from the death that was even then working through their members (Gal. 5:24).

"And set it upon a pole" — The word is nes. The same word is sometimes used to describe an ensign designed to call the people together (Isa. 11:12). The serpent on the pole, therefore, represented a public exhibition of sin's flesh silenced, conquered and crucified. Paul explained to the Galatian brethren that "Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you" (Gal. 3:1). His words signify that the crucified Lord Jesus had been publicly exhibited or placarded before humanity for the purpose of saving them from their sins. A similar exhibition was provided at this time of crisis in the wilderness.

"And it shall come to pass, that everyone that is bitten" — Those who felt the serpent's bite were invited to view the brazen serpent. This is the first essential to salvation to this day. A person must recognise his need of Christ, must realise that he is death-doomed and sinful, and so understand the urgency of his case, in order to acceptably approach God for salvation. In the wilderness, those who felt the effect of the venom working through their bodies realised the urgency of their need and hastened to seek the salvation offered by Yahweh. The same urgency must be instilled into those who are drawn by the Gospel today.

"When he looked upon it shall live" — Those bitten by the serpents were taught by God's Word to look upon the brazen serpent. They did not dispute what they should do, because they realised that time was critical, and their opportunity to escape death was limited. Immediate obedience to the instructions was imperative if they were to live. The same urgency remains today. On the day of Pentecost, Peter spake many words making that point: "With many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation" (Acts 2:40). In effect, he was repeating Moses' appeal.

However, it must be recognised that there was no magic in the serpent. The efficacy did not come from it, for it was lifeless and unable to help. The efficacy came from within the onlooker who had to exercise faith in the power of Yahweh to save. In the serpent on the pole they saw represented what was required of them: putting to death the desires and deeds of the flesh; a typical crucifixion of it as the way to life. It was the flesh that was responsible for the faithless murmuring that had brought the Israelites to the point of derth: and it had to be repudiated. Those "bitten" by the serpent had been made conscious of personal sin, and therfore humbled to seek the help of Yahweh through Moses. They realised that they did not conform to the harmlessness of the serpent on the pole, but manifested venom in their tongues like those on the ground. They had "sharpened their tongues like a serpent: adders' poison was under their lips" and they murmured against Moses and against God (Psa. 140:3). They had to learn to crucify the flesh, to overcome it whilst seeking the forgiveness of Yahweh.

VERSE 9 "And Moses made a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole" — The metal would have had to go through the fire in order to be shaped, and in doing so would have been purified (Num. 31:23; 16:38). This pointed forward to the Lord Jesus of whom it is written: "he learned obedience by the things which he suffered" (Heb. 5:8). The "things he suffered" were elements in his purification. In regard to the serpent in the wilderness, it is questioned as to whether the metal was bronze or copper. Both were known to the ancients. Bronze is an alloy of copper and tin. Bronze utensils have been found at Lachish and at Troy, showing that it was in use in ancient times. It is suggested that such bronze was made directly from a copper ore containing tin long before the two metals were artificially mixed. See The Cambridge Bible. The Hebrew word nechosheth signifies "copper" in Job 28:2, where it is described as a metal smelted directly from the ore.

"And it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass he lived." — Rotherham renders this: "As soon as he directed his look unto the serpent of brass . . ." A deliberate seeking of the serpent was required, not an accidental glance at it as the A.V. rendition might suggest. The Hebrew word "beheld" is nabat and signifies to scan, to look intently at. One can imagine the long, steady look that would be given by those bitten by the serpents, and who felt "the answer of death in themselves". "Look unto Me, and be ye saved", is the appeal of Yahweh (Isa. 45:22); "Look unto Jesus, the author and finisher of faith" (Heb. 12:2). The eyes of those who would be saved must be earnestly centred upon the Lord, must consider him as revealed in the Word, pondering his character and ways (see John 6:40), "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world", proclaimed John (John 1:29). Israel after the flesh will be compelled to do this at his second coming (Zech. 12:10). This drama in the wilderness taught the new generation of Israelites the need of disciplining self, and of seeking in faith the redemption that they could obtain in Yahweh. They were clearly shown that the healing power was not in the brazen serpent itself, but in Yahweh Who had ordered the whole process. When the afflicted Israelites looked at the serpent, they did so in obedience to God and in faith that it would heal. So with redemption in Christ. Christ is powerless to heal stricken humanity in the absence of a personal faith (Heb. 11:6). The whole process of redemption in Him is Divine, and must be according to God's requirements. It is God motivated, and witnesses to the love of God: "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). That statement is made on the background of reference to the serpent in the wilderness. Love, faith and action are all fused to bring about redemption. The brazen serpent was preserved until the time of Hezekiah, who destroyed it because it had become an object of worship, which was idolatry (2 Kings 18:4). This taught that it was not in the type, but in the reality, that the work of redemption is effected. See Paul's comment in 1 Cor. 10:9

sir isaac newton and the "serpent" in the garden of eden

Title: Symbolism of the Serpent in Isaac Newton's Interpretation of Biblical Texts

Introduction:

Sir Isaac Newton, renowned for his contributions to physics and mathematics, also delved into biblical interpretations. One intriguing aspect of his theological reflections is his scrutiny of the symbolic meaning behind the term "serpent" in the biblical narrative, particularly in the Garden of Eden. This analysis will explore Newton's insights, emphasizing his view that the serpent is not to be understood literally but rather as a symbol representing the spirit of delusion.

Newton's Perception of the Serpent:

Newton's examination of the biblical narrative led him to a profound understanding of the serpent's symbolism. He connected the serpent with the devil, suggesting that the reference to the serpent in the Book of Revelation, where the devil is cast into the bottomless pit, signifies the spirit of delusion reigning in the hearts of humanity. By identifying this deceptive spirit with the old serpent that deceived Eve, Newton established a continuity in biblical themes.

Continuity in Biblical Themes:

Newton, in his exploration of Genesis 3:15, drew a connection between the serpent's deception of Eve and the promise of the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head. He saw this as a continuous theme throughout the Bible, emphasizing that the old serpent would persist until Christ's triumph over it. This interpretation aligns with the proto-evangelium, or the first mention of the Gospel, in Genesis.

Symbolism and Allegory:

In asserting the symbolic nature of the serpent, Newton drew parallels with other biblical symbols. He argued that just as the Dragon in the Apocalypse is not a literal dragon and the Beasts in the books of John and Daniel are not actual beasts, the serpent should be viewed as a symbol. According to Newton, the serpent symbolizes the spirit of delusion rather than being a physical entity.

Serpent as Symbol of Adam's Sinful Nature:

Newton's interpretation extended beyond the immediate context of the Garden of Eden. He proposed that the serpent is symbolic of Adam's sinful nature. This perspective aligns with the broader theological concept that the serpent represents the fall of humanity into sin and disobedience. Understanding the serpent as a symbol allows for a more nuanced interpretation of the consequences of Adam and Eve's actions.

Conclusion:

Sir Isaac Newton's exploration of the symbolism of the serpent in the biblical narrative provides a unique perspective on the nature of evil and deception. By interpreting the serpent as a symbol rather than a literal creature, Newton establishes a continuity in biblical themes and highlights the overarching narrative of redemption through Christ. His insights contribute to a deeper understanding of the allegorical elements present in biblical texts and invite readers to consider the layers of meaning embedded in religious stories.

STOP TEACHING A LITERAL SERPENT!

sir isaac newton could see the truth behind the use of the word "serpent" in the garden.

The devils being cast into the bottomless pit & shut up that he should deceive the nations no more for a thousand years you may know that he is the spirit of delusion reigning in the hearts of men & by his being there called the old Serpent you may know that he is that same Serpent which deceived Eve.

And then, alluding to the proto- (Good News) Evangelium of Genesis 3:15 and thus emphasizing the continuity of this theme in the Bible, he writes: “For that old serpent was to continue till the seed of the woman should bruise his head, that is till Christ should vanquish & slay him”. 

A few lines later he confidently concludes that: the old Serpent was no more a real serpent then the Dragon in the Apocalyps is a real Dragon or then the Beasts in John & Daniel are real Beasts. It's only a
symbol of the spirit of delusion & therefore must be the sentence of this serpent for deceiving Eve must be interpreted accordingly.

The Genetics of Sin Romans 5:19

   The Genetics of Sin 

The biological understanding of Sin commonly referred to has original sin or inherited sin which is not a crime but a misfortune.

 

We will begin this study with an opening reading from Romans 5:19 (Literal Standard Version)  for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the One, will the many be constituted righteous.

Sin its original meaning 

Romans 3:23 New King James Version for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Sin means to miss the mark, for all have missed the mark and fall short of the glory of God

The Greek noun hamartia (Strong's 264 and 266) and its cognates have been in use since Homer, and tracing the evolution of the use of the term up through Aristotle shows three main categories of meaning. First is the original, literal sense, commonly translated into English as “miss,” meaning physically to miss something, to fall short, or go astray of a goal or target. Homer used the word frequently in battle scenes, to conjure images of hitting or missing intended targets (Bremer 1969: 30-31).

Judges 20:16 Berean Standard Bible
Among all these soldiers there were 700 select left-handers, each of whom could sling a stone at a hair without missing

The words translated "without missing" is the Hebrew word for sin here the word is used physically 

20:16 Among all this people [there were] seven hundred chosen men lefthanded ; every one could sling stones at an hair [breadth], and not miss (Strong's 2398 8686).

It is interesting to see how the Hebrew word used in that verse, which is translated as "miss" or "not miss," aligns with the original literal sense of the Greek term "hamartia" as "miss" or "falling short."

Two principal acceptations

Sin, in it's most comprehensive definition is "to miss the mark" - whether morally (transgression) or physically. Mankind was initially created with the intention of sharing in God's glory, (Romans 3:23) both physically and morally. Mankind has "missed the mark" both physically and morally. Due to the events in Eden, we are created (in the womb) in that fallen state, and thus born in sin

Therefore sin has two major meanings (Two principal acceptations) the transgression of the law next that physical element of the animal nature which causes all diseases death and resolution into dust

With this understanding of sin being physical we can now understand the expressions: the sin in the flesh, the sin in my members, the law of sin and death, the sin that dwells in me, the sin that brings forth death, the body of sin.

 The origin of Sin

How did death enter the world:

Gen 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Gen 3:17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’“Cursed is the ground because of you;through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. 18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,  and you will eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return

Romasn 5:12 because of this, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin—death; and thus to all men death passed through, for that all sinned;

The constitution of Sin

Romans 5:19 (Literal Standard Version)  for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the One, will the many be constituted righteous.

That is to say: The one man Adam disobeyed God and became a sinner. As a consequence all his offspring inherited sin from him even before becoming actual transgressors or sinners. In that way many “were constituted sinners.” However, by the obedience of the one man Jesus Christ to God the means were provided for many to “be constituted righteous.”

This "constitution" is elsewhere termed "sinful flesh" or "sin's flesh"; that is, "flesh" under the dominion of a sinful constitution and therefore subject to death (ch. 8:3; 6:9).

sin is hereditary

So Adam broke God’s law, and was adjudged unworthy of immortality, and sentenced to return to the ground from whence he was taken-a sentence which defiled and became a physical law of his being, and was transmitted to all his posterity including Jesus. (BASF C5)

How was sin transmitted to all his posterity?

 Through the flesh, blood and dna:

Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother aconceive me

So sin would be rooted within our DNA?

Yes sin is hereditary it is part of our genetic structure you could says its programmed into our DNA

Most scientists agree that aging and death seem somehow programmed into our genes. The question is: When, how, and why did they enter our genetic code, as it were?

The Bible gives us the simple answer—even though it does not present it in terms of genetics or DNA. Romans 5:12 reads: “That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.”

Sin and Death The physical law of decay 

If Sin bring forth death or has the power of death Hebrews 2;14 (the diabolos been an equivalent expression for sin.) Would this make sin a physical law of decay. 

Note the devil or diabolos is not a supernatural being but a personification of human nature abstract (transgression) and concrete (physical, sin in the flesh) manifested in individuals and collectively in the organisations and institutions of this present order of things

Yes sin is a physical law of decay see 1 cor 15:53-54 the Greek word translated corruption means Decay this corruptible body must put on in corruption so that the body of sin Romans 6:6 may be done away with

Decay Cognate: 5349 phthartós (an adjective, derived from 5351 /phtheírō) – perishable, what easily perishes disintegrates (corrupts) – like the break-down of the physical body during our natural lifetime. See 5351 (phteírō).

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance phthartós corruptible. From phtheiro; decayed, i.e. (by implication) perishable -- corruptible

This suggests that sin is a physical law related to the decay and corruption of the body.

Sin that physical element of the animal nature which causes all diseases death and resolution into dust. In this sense, sin is seen as both physical and symbolic of cellular decay within the body.

Sin causes physical deterioration of the human body over time.

Dr thomas elpis israel chapter 4

Man in his physical constitution is imperfect; and this imperfection is traceable to the physical organization of his flesh, being based on the principle of decay (cellular decay) and reproduction from the blood; which, acted upon by the air, becomes the life of his flesh. All the phenomena which pertain to this arrangement of things are summed up in the simple word sin; which is, therefore, not an individual abstraction, but a concretion of relations in all animal bodies; and the source of all their physical infirmities. 

The nature of the lower animals is as full of this physical evil principle as the nature of man; though it cannot be styled sin with the same expressiveness; because it does not possess them as the result of their own transgression; the name, however, does not alter the nature of the thing. (Elpis Israel)

Sin originate within the Brain 🧠 

Where in the flesh does sin emanate from?

Sin emanates from brain-flesh

Romans 8 (Literal Standard Version) for the mind of the flesh [is] death, and the mind of the Spirit—life and peace because the mind of the flesh [is] enmity to God, for to the Law of God it does not subject itself

The mind of the flesh or the thinking of the flesh is the brain 

emanting from the brain [physical], it [indwelling sin] excites the 'propensities', and these set the 'intellect' [mental], and 'sentiments' [moral] to work. The propensities are blind, and so are the intellect and sentiments in a purely natural state; when therefore, the latter operate under the sole impulse of the propensities, 'the understanding is darkened through ignorance, because of the blindness of the heart'". (Elpis Israel)

Where does sin originate? 

Mark 7:21-23 (New King James Version) 21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within and defile a man.”

Sin originates within the human heart which is symbolic of the mind the mind is thinking produced by the brain  

The dictionary says, Brain: "That part of the central nervous system that includes all the higher nervous centers; enclosed within the skull". In other words it is the physical member of the body that controls the biological functions of the body in addition to producing thoughts, attitudes &c.

Mind: the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought

Thus the Mind is thinking produced by the brain 

sin is biological

So sin would be a biochemical Impulse produced by the brain

Yes it is a biochemical reaction produced by the brain

So sin is physical (biological)?

Yes sin is physical (biological) because it is thinking and feelings produced by the brain

mental states are actually only physical states, are they not? I mean, the brain is just a-a chemical supercomputer

What are thoughts made of? ... They're really just electro-chemical reactions

It is generally accepted that the basic components of emotion pertain to brain and body states generated by neurological impulses and the cellular release of biochemical substances

Like it or not, emotions share some very real biochemical links with your nervous system, immune system and digestive system.

Consciousness is a property of the brain, and the brain is a biochemical engine or its just a chemical super-computer.

Sin is transmitted to all human beings through Adam, our biological ancestor. It is considered to be rooted within our DNA as a result of Adam's disobedience. The concept of sin being written into our DNA is a metaphorical expression to describe its hereditary nature.

Sin emanates from the flesh, specifically the brain. The brain is considered the thinking substance or the seat of the propensities that lead to sinful thoughts, desires, and actions. Sin's influence on human nature is believed to affect the mind, emotions, and moral inclinations, which are interconnected with the physical brain.

Therefore, according to this perspective, sin is understood to have a physical manifestation in the flesh, specifically within the brain, and it is transmitted through the biological lineage from Adam to all of humanity.

The understanding that thoughts are electro-chemical reactions and emotions are associated with brain and body states generated by neurological impulses and the release of biochemical substances can be used to explain the physical nature of sin.

According to this perspective, sin can be seen as a product of the physical processes occurring within the human body, particularly the brain. Thoughts, being electro-chemical reactions, arise from the intricate workings of neurons, neurotransmitters, and electrical signals. Sinful thoughts, in this context, would be a result of the specific patterns and interactions of these electro-chemical reactions in the brain.

Emotions, on the other hand, are influenced by the interplay of neurological impulses and the release of biochemical substances. The brain and body states associated with emotions can affect one's disposition and actions. In the case of sin, it can be argued that certain emotional states, driven by the release of specific biochemical substances, may lead individuals to engage in behaviors that go against moral or ethical standards

Furthermore, sin can be understood as a disruption or distortion of the normal functioning of these physical processes. It can be seen as a deviation from the optimal patterns of electro-chemical reactions and neurological impulses, resulting in thoughts and behaviors that are morally or ethically problematic

In summary, viewing sin through the lens of the physical nature of thoughts and emotions suggests that it is rooted in the electro-chemical reactions of the brain and the interplay of neurological impulses and biochemical substances. Sin represents a deviation or disruption of these physical processes, leading to thoughts and actions that are contrary to moral or ethical standards

Sin as Biochemical Impulse: According to your perspective, sin is seen as a result of biochemical impulses produced by the brain. The brain creates chemicals that influence our thoughts, emotions, and actions. These biochemical processes are believed to play a significant role in the manifestation of sinful behaviour

Influence of the Brain: You argue that since the mind, which is responsible for thinking, is produced by the brain, sin originates within the brain itself. The brain, being a physical organ, governs the biological functions of the body and produces the impulses that lead to sinful actions.

Emotional and Biochemical Links: You have mentioned that emotions have real biochemical links with the nervous system, immune system, and digestive system. This suggests that emotional experiences, including those associated with sin, are intricately connected to physiological processes within the body.

Law of Sin and Death: You reference the concept of the law of sin and death, which suggests that sin leads to physical decay and death. This implies that sin has tangible consequences on the physical well-being of individuals, supporting the notion of sin being a physical phenomenon.

Decay and Cellular Impact: Sin is described as a physical law of decay within the body. The corruptible nature of the human body, subject to sin, leads to deterioration and ultimately death. This further emphasizes the physical aspect of sin and its effects on the body's cellular processes.

sin is viewed as a physical phenomenon rooted in the human body and brain. Here is a detailed explanation of how sin is seen as physical:

Sin originates within the human heart/mind: The heart, symbolizing the mind, is considered the source of sin. The mind is understood as a product of the brain, a physical organ responsible for generating thoughts, attitudes, and emotions.

Sin as a biochemical impulse: Sin is perceived as a biochemical reaction produced by the brain. The brain creates chemicals that give rise to feelings, emotions, and thoughts associated with sinful actions or desires. This biochemical process is seen as the physical manifestation of sin.

Mental states as physical states: Mental states, including emotions, are believed to have genuine biochemical connections with the nervous system, immune system, and digestive system. This suggests that mental states, including sinful thoughts or desires, are ultimately rooted in physical processes within the body

Sin and the physical body: Sin is associated with various biblical expressions such as "the sin in the flesh," "the sin in my members," and "the law of sin and death." These passages imply a connection between sin and the physical nature of the human body. Sin is seen as a physical element of the animal nature that leads to decay, diseases, and ultimately death.

Sin as a physical law of decay: Drawing from passages like 1 Corinthians 15:53-54, where "corruption" is interpreted as decay, sin is understood as a physical law associated with the decay and corruption of the body. Sin is believed to contribute to the physical deterioration of the human body over time.

Original sin is sometimes called inherited sin

Sin in the flesh is hereditary; and entailed upon mankind as the consequence of Adam's violation of the Eden law. The "original sin" was such as I have shown in previous pages. Adam and Eve committed it; and their posterity are suffering the consequence of it. The tribe of Levi paid tithes to Melchisedec many years before Levi was born. The apostle says, "Levi, who receiveth tithes, paid tithes in Abraham". Upon the same federal principle, all mankind ate of the forbidden fruit, being in the loins of Adam when he transgressed. This is the only way men can by any possibility be guilty of the original sin. Because they sinned in Adam, therefore they return to the dust from which Adam came -- says the apostle, "in whom all sinned". There is much foolishness spoken and written about "original sin". Infants are made the subjects of a religious ceremony to regenerate them because of original sin; on account of which, acoording to Geneva philosophy they are liable to the flames of hell for ever! If original sin, which is in fact sin in the flesh, were neutralized, then all "baptismally regenerated" babes ought to live for ever, as Adam would have done had he eaten of the Tree of Life after he had sinned. But they die; which is a proof that the "regeneration" does not "cure their souls"; and is, therefore, mere theological quackery. (Elpis Israel)

In summary, your understanding of sin emphasizes its physical nature, rooted in the body and brain's biochemical processes. Sin is viewed as a result of the physical impulses and biochemical reactions generated by the brain, which manifest in sinful thoughts, emotions, and actions. It is seen as a physical law of decay that affects the human body and leads to various consequences, including diseases and death.