As we’ve seen in Babylonian Gods of Genesis, some of the earliest recorded gods and goddesses of the
early era of paganism could, very well, parallel these earliest characters of Genesis: Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel,
and, of course, the Serpent himself. With all of this knowledge at hand, we see that it might really be a
“small world after all.” Paganism and Biblical stories don’t seem to be too far apart, at least regarding the
adoption of these same characters. As we’ve stressed throughout this entire website, putting together the
mystery of ancient Babylon is much like trying to assemble a gigantic jigsaw puzzle:

If someone were to throw a thousands of pieces of a puzzle on the table and then throw away the box, you
would struggle long time to find and understand what the whole picture is.
                                                                                                      (Gayman, 1977, p. 15)[1]

Some who read this will begin to see revelations as the “pieces” come together; others just won’t see it,
and that’s ok. It’s not for everyone; and, as it may be difficult to put it all together, it’s not impossible. Most
of us, hopefully, will begin to notice the “writing on the wall,” the deeper into these stories we go.
With that said and done, in this section, we’ll probably begin to take fairly large strides towards putting the
pieces of this puzzle together. One very important piece lies in understanding the example that follows:

                                                  He (God) breathed life’s breath into Adam,
                                                  Then stamped the final mystery [on him].
                                                                    - Adamgirk: The Adam Book of Arak'el of Siwnik 218[2]

What
mystery is this? Let us say that one of the most important elements of the Mystery side of Mystery
Babylon
entail the mysteries which relate to the mind! Many aspects of this Mystery portion reside in what
goes on inside our brains, how we think, and why we think what we do. A number of political and religious
ideals we have today have originated from a
thought, somewhere. In fact, almost every action taken by a
human being was, first, preceded by their
thought.
Someone may say that, inside, they feel a little
low, for example. Another may say that they have some
darkness inside. What do these mean? Still another might feel like they are going through a living hell.
Beyond the literal sense, could there be duplicate associations for words such as this? Could there be
“parallels” to these words, from one
world to the next? In other words, if one person says that they are
going through “hell,” could this also have correlations to some aspect of our supernatural world? Maybe it
did mean more, back in ancient times. How about in our last section, for example: we recall, that upon the
death of her son, the goddess
Ishtar (a.k.a. Eve) descended to the underworld. Now, did she really de-
scend
to such a physical place; or, could it be that she fell, or descended, into a state of deep, mental
despair: a “hell,” or sorts, inside her mind? If we gather anything from the last section, the most important
thing to take with us is the possibility for
mental significances behind many early, ancient symbols.

As we know, the ancients used
symbols to express spiritual concepts, or points-of-view, in their artwork -
that’s all they had to work with at the time. They probably wanted to make sure the gazer understood all
of the levels of symbolism they were trying to portray. Over the years, the original meanings behind some
of these ancient symbols probably turned to dust. With the slow, gradual changes of cultures and empires
over the years these symbols must have undergone some change to their original meanings. The
wing of
some ancient deity, for example, could have stood, not only for a literal wing, but the deities’ ability to
swiftly” move back and forth between two worlds - the natural and supernatural. There were symbols, as
we’ll see, which also could have taken into account
mental or emotional elements of the individual the
artist is trying to portray! As we recall, the following reliefs describe
Ishtar/Enki’s (or Eve’s) ascent from
the underworld:












An individual ascending
out of the underworld, here, could also have signified their coming out of her
state of depression - a better state of mind. Some people, today, think that heaven and hell are here on
earth; it’s dependent on how one
looks at things. The color black, for example, could also have had
mental or emotional connotations to it.
Black or blackness could have helped symbolize one’s darkened
emotional state. It seems the color could also symbolize depression, despair, or the like. It seems clear
moral character could have associated colors, as well.

         …the color of the wicked was like bottom of a pot on account of the wickedness of their doings…
                                                                              - 3 Enoch (The Hebrew Book of Enoch) Ch. 44[3]

It only makes logical sense when we look at the following in this way.

                             …then God sent him (Adam)… down to earth with blackened face…
                                                                                                       (Al-amili, n. d., p. 2)[4]

Although it may be easy to assume that Adam, in the above, may have had his face turned
black as coal,
it doesn’t necessarily mean this. Another more probable explanation might present itself: God allowed
Adam to understand the guilt, sadness, and depression he should have felt over his choices in the Garden;
a temporary “
darkness” which invaded his heart and mind. These negativities, obviously, would have
shown up on his facial expressions. The ancient Greeks even made abstracted “deities” out of certain
negative emotions, such as
Blame, Distress, Deceit, and Strife. As we proceed, we’ll see more of these
ancient “thought” symbols, or concepts, and how they were incorporated into ancient artwork (such as the
aforementioned
wing). Soon, more examples will become apparent, and we’ll see how they apply to the
mystery side of Mystery Babylon. A problem with our putting together our “puzzle” lies with that, either
unintentionally or intentionally, original meanings of these symbols were obscured over time. If we gather
anything from the last section, the most important thing to take away would be there could have been
mental elements to a lot of this ancient symbolism (such as one’s “descent to the underworld”). This
psychological side to
Mystery Babylon will become much more prevalent and important as time goes on.

Much of what we are about to gather, in regards to the
real story of the Garden of Eden, may not coincide
with traditional thoughts about the topic. It certainly doesn’t “fit in” with almost all modern, Christian
interpretation. But, a vast majority of it, as always, comes
right from ancient writings or some accredited
author on the subject. If we combine the
mental elements of Mystery Babylon with all the information we
are about to present, we will begin to go much
deeper in our understanding. Sometimes, “new” thoughts
may lie in resurrecting the “old and forgotten.”
To proceed, let’s, again, continue with a
deeper look into what might have really happened “in the
beginning.”

The Former World - Of Angels

    It will come as a surprise to many to learn that angels inhabited this earth before the creation of man.
                                                                                                   (Armstrong, 1985, Part 8)[5]

What was the world like before Adam? What happened to turn it all into
chaos? Why would it be relevant to
our story of the Garden of Eden? We recall, in
Creation - the Gap & Deep, our former cosmos was de-
stroyed, as well as all life in it. There could have even been a number of times this cycle happened - an
organized “world,” or cosmos was destroyed; and recreated, once again. Although the Bible doesn’t
directly point towards what happened in the “world” before our own, and how it was destroyed, there are
other ancient sources which may: some are Judaic (such as the
Apocalypse of Baruch or Philo); most are
Islamic. The Islamic historian,
Tabari, for example, provided a majority of this information on this previous
world. Much in these accounts relate to a confrontation between terrestrial angels who supposedly inhab-
ited this planet before the world of Adam. Apparently, there must have been some manner of civilization,
comprising of these angels and, probably, human beings. These former “worlds” obviously weren’t perfect -
like our world, today - because they had to be destroyed for whatever reason. This seemingly-consistent
streak of imperfection continued on, throughout the ages.
The Real Adam and Eve
                                                   Copyright 2015, Brett T., All Rights Reserved.
  
       No content of this article or of mysterybabylon.com may be reproduced, duplicated, given away,
   
                transmitted or resold in any form without prior written permission from the author.
Serpent Now to Have Conversation with Eve

As we recall, the heavenly angel Sammael “rode atop of” the terrestrial Serpent (i.e. he was allowed to
“possess” him), and, they, together, were on their way toward attempting to bring Adam down. The two,
together, possessed a great deal of this other-worldly knowledge. All they had to do was to find an oppor-
tunity to capitalize on the situation. The opportunity arose. Adam’s mistake was one arrow in their quiver,
already. Adam and Eve were lying together, just resting; but Eve became a little anxious to get up and
actually do something. She saw the Serpent in another area of the Garden, and it looked like to her that
he wanted to strike up a conversation.

Adam was sleeping… with naïve curiosity and the aversion to the boredom of silence… Eve quietly eased
her body away from sleeping Adam to glade to the waiting Serpent.
                (Eichhorn, 1957, p. 17)[107]

The Serpent's Poison Thoughts

As we know, another name for the Serpent - Azazel - meant, “the strong one of God;” while Sammael
meant “the poison of God.” After all of this would go down in the Garden, their names may have both been
changed, to reflect a
negative tone. Now, they, together, would be the strength of an adversary against
God, as well the one who’d preach
poison against the word of God. Their poison was about to begin -
in their attempt to seduce Eve, then Adam; and, through other terrestrial angels, also to the rest of
mankind...

                                                                                 - - -

For more information on the above section, please browse our selection of
Mystery Babylon books (especially
The Rise of Mystery Babylon - The Tower of Babel (Part 1)”!
Any safety concerns of Adam seemed to be quite justified. He and his Garden were surrounded by a num-
ber of terrestrial angels who hoped to do him harm. The Bible even hints that 1/3 of God’s angels rebelled
against Him, and joined the movement of the Serpent and Sammael. Adam was intelligent, but vastly
outnumbered. But, of course, Adam had the one ally on his side unlike all others:
God.

The knowledge Adam and his wife had was probably limited to the world they
knew. As previously
suggested, the Serpent, Sammael, and other angels could have experienced the world before Adam, and
had a lot of knowledge of how things may have worked. How could these angels overthrow him? They had
knowledge; most probably, “other worldly” knowledge that Adam didn’t:

                                The One who gave man intelligence gave it to the serpent as well.
                                            - Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on the Creation 77[101]

"Do Not Touch"

Adam probably went about his business, serving God, and utilizing his new management position; but,
almost positively, there was tension in the air.[102] In his everyday walk, God probably gave Adam
specific instructions on how to live, as well as how to think. We recall, God instructed Adam, plainly, to
not
eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam may have had to forward this information to Eve;
and, just to make sure his help meet was doing things right (at least, in his eyes), he decided to do this his
own way. God told Adam not to eat of the Tree; simple. Adam (to make sure he “drove his point home”) told
Eve not to eat, as well as not
to touch. The most probable reason Adam added this additional information
was that, in his desire to make his help meet think as
cautiously as he did, conceived the idea that she may
need additional instructions. It was plain he did not trust the words of God, and felt the necessity to add
additional verbiage to this statement.[103] This was the beginning of Adam’s error:

He felt that he was stronger in mind and in will than was she and, consequently, she would have to be
given extra physical and spiritual safeguards in order that she might be protected against any physical or
spiritual force which would seek to do her harm.
                                        (Eichhorn, 1957, p. 13-14)[104]

In a way, it sounded
noble to do this to his wife; in a way, it didn’t. Regardless, it was disobedient because
it wasn’t what God said to do! There could have been another reason Adam felt the need to do it this way:

It was because of his affection for Eve and because of his desire to do that which he thought was best for
her welfare that Adam tried to improve upon the wisdom and will of God.
       (Eichhorn, 1957, p. 14)[105]

No man - even the man whose soul was breathed directly to him by God - could
improve on God, himself!
Obedience was crucial here; not the addition of one’s own “two cents worth.” Adam wanted to show love
for Eve, here, assuredly. Again, this sounded noble, especially in today’s world; but, Adam didn’t need to
improve upon the will and wisdom of the Creator of our universe! It was the first, grand mistake of the
Garden.
Through this act, Adam may have, inadvertently, even helped contribute to his own downfall - by setting up
a situation where Eve could be confused, and not believe him. Eventually, she could even be convinced
that he
lied to her - and that’s exactly what happened.[106] This was the Serpent’s opportunity to drive a
wedge between their love and total trust.
So, from man's rib God creates this rational being, and in his inventive wisdom he makes it complete and
perfect, like man in every detail rational, capable of rendering him what would be of assistance in times of
need and the pressing necessities of life. It was God, you see, who was arranging everything in his wisdom
and creative power.
                                            - St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis Homily 15[82]

Interestingly enough, God probably wanted Eve to
think like Adam; hence the reason for His choice of
Adam’s
rib:

           God made Eve from a rib, a part of the body which, notably, was the most modest and chaste.
                                                                                        (Bialik and Ravnitzky, 1992, p. 19)[83]

Apparently, God intended Eve to think with much of the same humility, reasonable, and rational thinking as
Adam. Even though they were both of one body, they, naturally, should still be different in
some ways,
however. They were different in gender, which, at least, could have given them
some differences of opinion.
Ultimately, they were two individuals, and no two people are
exactly alike. Regardless, they got along, and
Adam was happy - at least for now. God was pleased with the ways they thought, and how they acted.

Adam and Eve's "Spark"

In some respects, Adam could have even been thought of as another “Fiery Being,” of sorts, before the
Fall; just like his angelic counterparts. It seems there had been a piece of this ”fiery” nature that God
allotted to Adam and Eve's soul, as well.[84]

On that day, God gave the new couple… a piece of the Divine Name… And so Adam changed his name…
(and Eve’s name, as well), adding a holy spark to their union. But God warned them that this gift might not
be theirs forever. For if they shut God… out of their hearts and betrayed their love for each other the divine
spark would abandon them and return to God. Then each would… be only left with… fire. And this fire
would consume their love and destroy them.
                                      (Frankel, 1989, p. 24)[85]

Interestingly enough, “The suffix ‘
ah’ - at the end of many Hebrew names - can mean "of God," "from God,"
or "brother of God.”[86] The original names given to Adam and Eve could have been “
Adamah” and
Chavah,” respectively. Possibly, the angelic “fire” was represented by the addition of certain emotions and
passions to their thoughts, as well! This surely could have been willed, at least in some degree, to all the
souls of mankind; well maintained by a rational sense of restraint and temperament. At first, these “fires”
must have worked well - it helped build passion in their sexual activity, for example. Nothing, seemingly,
was done out of any bounds by anyone; nothing was unsavory. It all seemed to work with people; and all
retained some sense of a reasonable or sensible boundary. Which leads us to this:

                                  …the sexual urge is always natural and only sometimes sinful.
                                                                                                  (Eichhorn, 1957, p. 21)[87]

It seems there is a lot of inner “fire” inherent in the sexual act, itself. As a small flame might develop into a
huge bonfire, the act of coition seems to generate more and more “heat” (only, on a different level). The
act, itself, wasn’t really looked upon in any negative way back then, however:

     And God blessed them. That is, the generative power which he infused in them, that is their blessing.
                                                                  - Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament 6a 28[88]

And what a paradise they had: plenty of this healthy passion, without evil connotations attached to it. The
Garden was truly a place of wonderful parameters, open understanding, and no corruption or excesses we
hear about today; “…God created the garden for the pleasure of humanity…”[89] So pleasurable was it,
in fact, that Adam and Eve seemed to be in a continual state of blissful nakedness.
Their up-and-coming temptation would allow for, not only their
loss of innocence, but the loss of the
glorious,
divine apparel which surrounded them. Ultimately, it allowed for, as well, the perversion of the
internal “fires” within their minds.
But, until then, Adam and Eve didn’t just lie around and enjoy the pleasures of the Garden; they both
worked. They both had roles in the Garden. There were reasons for these roles, apparently – and, this,
also, seemed to have
mental connotations.

Idleness

The reason God wanted Adam and Eve to do at least some work was that, obviously, it must have been
good for them, in some way. Even back in the Garden, there were positive implications of
work on the
human psyche.

                      The ideal existence for man is not idle enjoyment, but easy and pleasant work…
                                                                                            (Skinner, 1956, p. 66)[90]

God wanted Adam “to till it that he might not be a lover of
idleness…” and, also, to “till the garden and
watch over it lest he be unsettled by the exceeding
indulgence (of God).”[91] In other words, if Adam
and Eve did nothing but lay around, they might begin to take all of God’s kindness, favor, and leniency for
granted.

If, after all, he (Adam) had been relieved of all need to work, he would have fallen a victim to great
indulgence and at once have slipped into sloth; whereas in fact by performing some work that was pain-
less and without difficulty he would be brought to a better frame of mind.
                                                                  - St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis Homily 14[92]

Again, it’s was about one’s way of
thinking, one’s mental health, and having a healthy mental attitude.
Even though their world was wonderful and easygoing, there were still some things around which were
“not quite right.” Maybe another reason God put Adam to work, within the confines of a walled Garden, was
to keep him alert, and "on guard" for it. Maybe there
could have been questionable elements in their world
to watch out for; even in this finest hour:

     …the reason why God planted the Garden of Eden, in which to isolate Adam and Eve, so that they
                           might (have) found a “thinking” race capable of resisting all evil influence.
                                                                                                   (Bristowe, 1950, p. 94)[93]

The Garden of Eden, as already stated, was a
walled garden, and only certain individuals were allowed in.
Why? Adam and Eve both had the positions of
watching over the Garden, as well. Again, why? Maybe there
was something unsavory, or downright evil, on the outside, left over from our previous world. Maybe some
of the terrestrial angels around could seek to do them harm, and weren’t allowed in. Maybe some of these
had knowledge which, if they were allowed in, could possibly put an end to them.

Angels Turned Worse

We know reasons why the surrounding terrestrial angels would have been contrary to Adam:

                    (The) Enemy was jealous because [Adam and Eve] were richer in glory and reason
                                                             than any other creature on the earth.
                                                        - St. Ephrem the Syrian: Selected Prose Works Section II 22[94]

Add
envy, jealously, and all the other things which angered the Serpent and Sammael over this time, and
we have a good reason why only some terrestrial angels were allowed in, and some weren’t. The Serpent,
though, still had limited access to the Garden.[95]

                                     When Adam is not here, the Serpent will look after Paradise.
                                                                                        - Saltair na Rann 1193-1196[96]

Due to his position, “…he (the Serpent) would have been second only to Adam in the animal hierarchy.”[97]
We already know that Sammael (i.e. Satan) was not allowed in: “Nor was Satan himself permitted to come
to Adam in the garden, neither in human appearance nor in divine vision.”[98] Each angel, for their own
individual reasons, vowed vengeance on Adam, and for their
subjugation.

The Serpent rationalized how God “screwed him over,” and, thought to himself:

                  "…as you have beguiled me I will certainly make (vices) alluring to them on earth,
                                                               and I will beguile them all."
                                                                                             (Kathir, 2006, p. 109)[99]

Sammael, as well, dreamed about how things would be for Adam after he took out his revenge:

                           "…you being put out of the land of good Paradise and I being put
                                                                  out of holy Heaven."
                                                                                   - Saltair na Rann 1781-1784[100]
Most of the angels around understood their role, and would bow down to Adam's authority. Sammael, the
Serpent, and certain other angels, on the other hand, utilized their “makeup” to the fullest potential. As
one may suspect, a being from
fire could be prone to act with a lot of emotions, passions, or be apt to
exhibit these qualities of “frivolity, impatience, haste, and burning.” The word
frivolity can be equated to
“thoughtlessness, idleness, triviality, inconsequentiality, and foolishness” - the
opposite of getting down
to business in a serious way; the opposite of using common sense; as well, being unconcerned about any
sort of serious purpose. The Serpent and Sammael were beginning to let their emotions run amuck. They
let their “fires inside” to take over their rational thinking. They obviously must have considered their ways
of thinking “a step above” Adam, because they were
closer to the divine.
It’s so important to understand all of these
mental elements to the Garden of Eden story, as well. In
regards to the Serpent/Sammael, it was “his
natural disposition and evil composition that betrayed
him… (as he was created from fire).”[65] Both were allowing his
own nature to deceive him; which, in the
end, “compelled him to baseness.”[66]

Adam's Different Mind

These “spiritual” qualities in dust weren’t the only thing about Adam that was different. God, as many of
us know, created Adam for a
unique working purpose in the Garden, and by His own hand. This,
assuredly, would have added fuel to those “fires” of angelic envy.[67] On top of this, God would “breathe”
a soul directly into Adam: a strong,
rational soul![68]

       …the "breath of life" might reasonably be taken as indicating that man received the non-material
                                                  or spiritual side of his being from his Maker...
                                                                                                 (Brandon, 1963, p. 124)[69]

                                           So Adam created on earth with Breath from above.
                                                                                                  (Schwartz, 2004, p. 136)[70]

This soul, or “breath of life,” also seems to have
mental elements to it. We may soon begin to see how the
above
soul could actually equate to a person’s use of their conscious, or rational, mind.
Apparently, the
intellect of Adam was something special, as well; but it was not the same as our world
would most often define
intelligence, today.[71] It wasn’t necessarily how much information Adam had, or his
I.Q., but (first and foremost) the
way he thought about things, and how he understood things.[72]
One author describes Adam’s divine gift of intelligence as his “living soul” - of which this soul was equated
to one’s reflective or intellectual life.[73] In other words, Adam was
reflective of his surroundings: he under-
stood and faced up to what he did. He always remained in his conscious thought.
He was also probably given the capacity to reasonably understand feelings of guilt, and how one should
deal with these feelings. Interestingly enough, Adam was known as the "
blusher.” Blushing is an outward,
physical characteristic of one who feels guilt, shame or embarrassment. He did not only come from
red
dust, but he was able to show red, or blood, in his face - when it was time for him to feel embarrassed. This
was probably a failsafe, given by God, to make Adam
physically responsible for his actions, and for every-
one to see it - any guilt would and should, literally, show up
on his face.

Beyond his outward ability to show guilt, Adam had a good deal of intelligence. Interestingly, the ancient
Romans often linked the word
man or manu (of which the Hebrew Adam could be equated) “with person-
ified intelligence and prudence.”[74] The word
intelligence could also mean “the ability to govern and
discipline oneself by the use of reason.”[75]
Prudence means, “shrewdness in the management of
affairs.”[76] In summary, Adam didn’t go “overboard” with his thinking. He thought about things
before he
did them, and maintained a “level head.” Another interpretation of
intelligence is the “basic eternal quality
of divine Mind” - interesting to link
intelligence with the divine, here.[77] Because his soul was given to
him directly from God, naturally, it’s easy to assume that Adam strongly possessed a number of mental
facilities akin to how God most likely
wanted His people to act! That is why this is all so important, here.

These ways of thinking must have made Adam famous to others around him.[78] We recall, in Gen. 2:19-20,
Adam was involved in a contest between him and all the terrestrial angels around the Garden - whoever
could name all the animals that walked in front of them would be the winner. We know who won. The
angels were taken back by this defeat. What the angels lost, most importantly to them, was their
pride.
Although they lost, Adam remained
humble; and the angels should have taken note at his example. This
was just the way it was back then; and God wanted those terrestrial angels and humans alike to under-
stand each other’s role in this world; and that this was the way
He wanted it.

All of the Sex Around Him

Around this same time, a number of the Adamites, pre-Adamites, as well as the animals around him,
seemed to have mates. In a lot of these pairings, coition was most probably taking place. Adam knew most
of the couples around him were having sex, and enjoying the pleasures in the process; and he probably felt
alone.[79] According to a few ancient sources, he may have even tried to cohabitate with some of the other
women around him; ultimately, not getting along with any of them.[80]
There is a very interesting account which states the following: after Adam became manager of the Garden,
Sammael and the Serpent (as we know) spoke out against it. So, God “demoted” both angels. Because of
their rebellion, God may have decided to punish Sammael even more, for whatever reason!
He could have, at this time, then took Lilith (a female consort to Sammael) and gave her to be Adam’s wife!
This surely infuriated Sammael - the most significant female in his existence was now in the arms of the
one he hated the most. But, obviously, all of this was by design - his extreme thoughts of
pride probably
merited this resolve. There had to be some sort of punishment for such a dissention by these top angels.

Adam and Lilith, ultimately, did not get along; probably because Lilith had much of the same “fiery” passions
as her counterpart Sammael. Both were probably quick to act, and got carried away by their thoughts and
attitudes. Lilith and Adam simply did not see “eye to eye,” and she resisted Adam’s position as a man,
among other things. She eventually retreated from her wifely responsibilities, and Adam was, again, alone.
Regardless of this, Sammael was probably “bubbling over” with thoughts of revenge, at this point.

Eve

Lilith was gone; Adam was back in the same position again. There still seemed to be no one Adam wanted
to be with. Enter
Eve. This woman was fashioned directly from Adam, as many of us know - from one of
his ribs… you can’t get much closer than that! After creating her, God led her to her new husband, and
said “I provided you with a helpmate of your kind.”[81] What could be a reason that Adam was not satis-
fied with Lilith, or other people of whom he was with? Maybe a woman strait from Adam had an important
detail that other people purely did not have:
similar ways of thinking! Because Eve was made right out
of that same dust, she probably thought a lot of the same ways as her husband!

A viceroy, simply, is “a regal official who runs a country, colony, or city province in the name of and as
representative of the monarch.”[38] Adam would become the
representative of God’s leadership in this
newly-refashioned order of things. Man, especially
Adam, was to be God’s “Crown of Creation,” and not
the angels. God did not do this to downgrade them, nor did He create Adam to become an idol. The “pro-
stration before Adam by Angels was not for Adam but for
obeying God and endearment for Adam.”[39]
Adam, as we’ll see, also wasn’t out to elevate himself, because of this position, either. He was just there to
do it the way God wanted. God really loved him, and wanted the best for this man and all other men and
women around him. Regardless, this love wasn’t accepted by the surrounding angels:

It happened, while they were all worshipping, that we (the Elohim - God and the rest of His angels) came
to the first angel whom we had created. The firstborn said to him (God), "I will never worship him who is
less than I."
                                                                         - Enthronement of the Archangel Michael[40]

Again, Sammael, the “firstborn” of heaven, considered Adam extremely
inferior.[41] If one would think about
it, then: just
who was the first “racist” in our world? Who would be the first individual to feel “superiority” over
another? It might not be who many of us think: it was
Satan. Let’s look more at how Sammael (i.e. Satan)
began to feel the way he did.
He continued:

                                             "Shall we then adore a being formed from dust?”
                                                                                     (Graves and Patai, 1964, p. 82)[42]

Well, most of us know that Adam was fashioned from
dust; from a specific type of red, sandy dust, actually;
not hard ground; not clean, black soil (like the other pre-Adamites may have been). To begin His formation,
God added a bit of water to this dust, which turned into a mud-like substance (or
clay) in His hands.[43]
As special as one might assume Adam was, most of us also know that dust is truly
nothing special. Actually,
dust is symbolic of anything “more lowly and substantial even than earth…”[44] Now, why would God want
to create Adam, His
viceroy, out of something less than other people; something as worthless and insub-
stantial as dust?

                (Adam was made)… with poor material, that in this way might be shown the admirable
                                                                     skill of the craftsman.
                                                                   - Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament 6b 7[45]

And:

                      …from such a worthless material, He (God) might bring [man] to divine glory.
                                                                   - Adamgirk: The Adam Book of Arak’el of Siwnik 197[46]

There’s a reason for everything.
Along with Adam being created this way for the above reasons, there also seems to be
mental conno-
tations to why Adam was formed from
dust, as well. It’s some strange, “spiritual” way of looking at the way
things work on this earth: what one is “made out of” supposedly stands as a predictor of their future be-
havior. Those formed from humble
dust, following this example, should live out their lives by acting, often,
in
humble ways. Adam was reportedly created in just such a way so that he shouldn’t normally become
arrogant, and understand his place under God.[47] “Modesty, therefore, was to be a prime quality of
Adam.”[48]

When we are humbled we learn to respect proper limits… he (God) gave him (Adam) complete control of
visible things lest out of ignorance of the composition of his own being he might conjure up inflated notions
of his own importance and transgress the limits proper to him.
                                                                 - St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis Homily 12[49]

Self-absorbed
pride was to be nowhere in Adam’s thoughts. The attitude of humility, however, seemed
very important to God; quite the opposite of how the Serpent and Sammael were starting to carry on.

Composition

Beyond this use of dust, God had more in store for His special formation. It wasn’t necessarily the color of
Adam’s skin, or his outward appearance, but the way he
thought about things, and looked at things, is what
made him special.
Another interestingly thought: Adam, it seemed, was made from a material which was
less worthy than
what the other pre-Adamites of his day were made from. Logic would assume that, since Adam was
created to be manager of the Garden, he should have been made from something
more worthy. The more
worthy of a substance one was made out of should dictate how
worthy of a person they are; right?
Obviously, this did not apply to Adam. Why? Probably because God wanted to show that it really didn’t
matter
what a person was made out of, it’s what they did with what they had that made all the difference!
It was individual
choice; it was attitude - not being made from something more worthy. We recall Abel, for
example, was probably the son of the Serpent himself; even
that wouldn’t stop him from having the right
attitude, and making the choices to obey his God with proper sacrifice!
In this way, the composition of Adam allowed him a way to
shine. Even beings from such a seemingly
“unworthy” substance like
dust could, using proper free-will, attitude, and work, could still accomplish
great things.

Still Not Good Enough for Sammael & the Serpent

The angels were made from more of a “heavenly” material than any of these lowly men. Wouldn’t that be
good enough for Sammael and the Serpent? It obviously wasn’t, because God knew their hearts; He knew
their pride. The two were at the “boiling point” of emotional passion because of Adam. God said to
Sammael, point blank, about how it was, and how it was going to be: “…this creature (Adam)…
surpasses
you in wisdom and understanding.[50]
Apparently, just because Adam was made from something “less” than Sammael did not mean he didn’t
have some exceptional qualities. As a probable result of discontent towards God’s original plan, Sammael
was no longer allowed to
enter the Paradise of the Garden of Eden.[51] Since the Serpent felt much the
same way, he may have been allowed only limited access. The Serpent now complained that his life was
only a “mundane existence,” after hearing Adam would be the Earth’s new viceroy.[52] Being “demoted”
in these ways only upset them all the more.[53]
Why wasn’t this lowly composition of Adam, at least, enough to make the angels feel a little content about
their own selves? If they were on such a “higher” level than Adam in the first place, why were they becoming
so intimidated by human creatures made from lowly earth, or dust?

Dust vs. Fire

Like the angels, Adam, at first, was said to have radiated “light;” seemingly along the same lines as the
angelic beings around him.[54] This “light” is regarded “as the first manifestation of the God’s essence.”[55]
As discussed in
Creation - the Gap & Deep, around the time of the Creation of Genesis, this “light” may be
linked to God’s creation of angels on the
first day; because angels can also be viewed as “a spiritual
essence consisting entirely of
light.”[56] In other words, Adam had this same brightness as the angels; and,
seemingly, was built not to age.[57] The angels probably felt intimidated, first, that there was a terrestrial,
human being on this same “level” as them, at least in these regards. Adam was also considered very good
looking:

   His (Adam's) person was so handsome that the very sole of his foot obscured the splendor of the sun.
                                                                                               (Ginzberg, 1909, p. 28)[58]

It’s interesting to see, in the above, how Adam was thought to be so “radiant” with heavenly light that he
was even thought to have
outshone the sun. We recall in our last section how Adam and the sun probably
were paralleled, according to pagan thought. Now, we see more reasons why. One author stated that
Adam was created, “for the
service of the Holy One, and the orb of the sun for the service of mankind.”[59]
In other words, Adam and the sun were similar in this way because the two were both
symbols of the
highest authority in the world! Adam would benefit the earth in a
spiritual way (as in being God’s viceroy);
the sun would benefit the earth in a
natural way (as in its warmth and life-giving properties). We now can
see even
more reasons why the ancients probably associated Adam (and, eventually the Serpent) with
the sun; both were fashioned for the service of mankind!
As an earthly “shepherd” over animals, people, and angels alike, Adam wasn’t exactly the same as other
angels in one respect: while both the angels and Adam radiated heavenly light, Adam was
still made from
lowly dust; a number of the angels around him, however, were made out of a divine fire (or, a so-called
“smokeless” fire).[60] Most of us know the characteristics of
fire: it can become extremely hot; it can easily
get out of control; it can quickly burn and scorch. Fire can be
dangerous if not corralled or put out. Could
fire also have this strange, “spiritual” significance to it, like dust? Could fire also have parallels with the
way an individual
thinks? We’ve already seen that, although “inferior” in some aspects, Adam’s composition
of
dust could have provided some unique mental qualities to him, such as humility. There are more mental
attributes attributed to this
dust (or clay) of which Adam was formed:

                 Clay is not inferior to fire. It has characteristics of calmness, clemency, endurance
                                              and growth. Fire is violent, hasty, and it burns...
                                                                                                  (Kathir, 2009, p. 32)[61]

The meaning of
clemency is the “disposition to be merciful,” or to be “moderate (in the) the severity of
punishment due.” In other words, Adam, from his origins, could have been more of the type to show
leniency, mercy, and love to those around him.[62] Was this unlike the angels, who were composed of fire?

…soil (an earthly element) is more beneficial and better than fire, as in the soil there are qualities of
serenity, gentleness, perseverance, and growth. While in fire there are qualities of frivolity, impatience,
haste and burning.
                                                                          (Kathir, 2003, p. 24)[63]

Anyone (i.e. human beings) born from the
soil and dust of the earth could have different qualities to their
character than those born of fire. This may give us a
good deal of insight to why these angels may have
felt so much dissent. These angels, composed of a “divine” fire, could have actually
thought differently
than human beings; as well, have had a different
attitude towards the world!
If we look at the above, these angels, from their nature, could have had more of a “fiery” disposition -
more
emotions, greater passions, and, often, more of an impatient demeanor to them. Adam and the
human race were fashioned this way to show to the world more of a serene way of working out things -
to be
gentler in thought and action. This, obviously, seemed to be the way God wanted individuals in this
new world of Adam to behave.
It was fairly easy to assume Adam enacted his inner potential for calm and tranquility. With perseverance,
he worked with “continued effort to do or achieve something despite difficulties, failure, or opposition.”[64]
He didn’t quickly give up on any task in the Garden, even if it may have posed a little difficulty. He didn’t
complain; he didn’t murmur; he didn’t play “the victim.” He took responsibility for his actions and did what
needed to be done. Adam strove to make something out of the Garden, and
himself. Above it all, Adam did
not let his emotions, his passions, nor his
pride, get the better of him; nor did he allow those to obstruct
his vision of accomplishment and
respect towards his God. All of these traits allowed the people and angels
around him to respect him as a
beacon of high moral character.
Voice they did.

Envy and Jealousy

The angels showed “jealously at humanity’s ‘appointment’ as supreme authority under Yahweh (God) on
earth - as opposed to the sons of God getting that job…”[31] Mankind, particularly their newly-appointed
leader, Adam, was considered God’s
prime creation, which transpired into a big threat to these angels.
Negative thoughts began to flow into their minds, such as, ”God will love him more than He does us.”[32]
Adam’s position also began to arouse this
envy - in the Serpent, especially.[33] From envy comes scorn.
Both Sammael and the Serpent became “… proud of their cause,” and “distaining” towards Adam.[34]
Distaining, simply, is defined as, “to look upon or treat with contempt; despise; scorn,” “consider beneath
one self,” or “to think unworthy of.”[35] These angels were about to let their pride overflow, for all to see.

The 'Worship' of Adam

          Said Satan… "entering into paradise shalt place me near to those two lumps of clay that are
                                                             newly walking upon the earth."
                                                                                        - Gospel of Barnabas 40[36]

Who were these “
lumps of clay?” This sure sounds like a distaining comment to for someone to make!
A little prejudiced, maybe? As we’ll see, the upcoming
addition of Adam to their world, in the opinion of
some angels, would translate into a major insult to their own feelings of
superiority, a challenge to their
own knowledge base, and an intrusion into their lofty self-opinions. The Serpent and Sammael would take
it to the extremes, much more personally than all the rest - because of the positions they once had. God
was going to do something to challenge, at least in their own minds, their sovereignty to the
utmost:

                …(the) Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the earth.
                                                                                               (Al-amili, 2004, p. 1)[37]
Snake and serpent references, among ancient Mesopotamians, then “identified divine wisdom, sexual
energy, and a guard over the world domains.”[18] All of the talents imputed into this particular serpent of
the Garden would have given him the “upper hand” in dealing with Eve, and the ability to seduce her in a
number of ways. Just how wise was the Serpent?

                     This is the secret (or mystery) of the holy language, that a serpent is a seraph,
                                                            as an angel is called seraph.
                                                                                      (Anonymous, 1834, p. 53)[19]

The prefix
ser (of serpent) means “higher being.” Some serpents could have been blessed enough to be of
this “physician” or ”doctorate” class. Those who reached this high angelic rank were known as the
Seraphim - and the Serpent was one.[20]

The Serpent and Sammael did possess some similarities, but they had differences, as well. The Serpent
was from this academic, or “doctorate,” background; Sammael a member of the heavenly “military.” The
Serpent was also anointed to be a
terrestrial angel; unlike the heavenly Sammael. As Sammael governed
over the higher orders of the heavens, the Serpent, at least at one time, ruled or governed over the lower
areas of the heavens, which included the earth, itself.[21]
The terrestrial Serpent once was even, believe it or not, considered extremely
devoted to God: he was “the
foremost of worshipers among the angels and the best of their scholars.”[22] He even was said to have
“zealously worshiped God” to the utmost.[23] All of his pre-world knowledge and devotion could have
opened some doors for him in the world of Adam.
Apparently, his zealous determination could have opened one more door for him, in the process: his
haughtiness![24] He started to become so pleased with himself that, over time, he began to think “he was
superior” to everyone around him.[25] Because of this pride, the Serpent also began to be “overbearing
toward his Lord.”[26]

We have already brushed on another proper name for this Serpent:
Azazel (or Azazil).[27] Before he
began to succumb to his pride, and commit his mighty acts of disobedience against Adam, Azazel’s name
meant “the strength” or “strong one of God.”[28] After his rebellion, it became pretty apparent he would be
viewed from then on as one who rebelled “with strength,” or was the “strong one”
against God.

Free Will

What could have happened to these two, to allow them to falter from their once-lofty positions? Why would
they show such animosity against their Lord? The answer is simple. It’s something that we see blasted all
over today’s media: bigotry, prejudice, and racism! Their “racism,” although similar in principal, was be-
tween terrestrial, angelic beings and mankind. It obviously originated when it looked like God valued
man
more than the angels - enough to make one of them in charge. These negative thoughts apparently began
deep within some of them, especially the Serpent and Sammael. They began to utilize what God gave
every man and angel - free will.
As the quote goes: “the greatest freedom is truly the freedom of choice.”[29] This is all so true. Angels and
mankind were able to decide for
themselves whether or not to follow God. Some would stubbornly use their
God-given gift to its fullest potential, and allow their own pride to get in the way.

   …happiness is only attained by the free will agreeing in its freedom to accord with the will of God…
                                                and in such disobedience (one) found misery.
                                                                                        (Baring-Gould, 1881, p. 15)[30]

A number of the terrestrial, as well as celestial, angels of the day were about to voice openly their own
opinions on the plans God had for His brave, new world. These plans were to begin in the Garden of
Eden, with Adam at the helm.
We will now discover another very important ancient symbol which may have changed over the years:
the Serpent himself! We recall, there may have been a number of ancient symbols which could have
mental connotations associated with them. The serpent, in ancient times, had a great deal of symbolism.
From what we know in the Bible, the Serpent’s Hebrew name,
Nachash, wasn’t a proper name; it was more
of a descriptive
title. One meaning of Nachash was "enchanter:" one skillful in the art of enchanting or
soothsaying. Quite often, ancient pictographs of a serpent probably weren’t made to represent an
actual
serpent, or even a human being with a face of a serpent. One important (and, probably lost) mental ass-
ociation with the serpent symbol could lie in the
wisdom of a particular being![17] The serpent symbol was
probably an ancient symbol of
wisdom. These 50-or-so serpents (i.e. the Nephilim), as well as the Serpent
himself, could have
looked like other terrestrial humans - they were just very, very wise.

                                                      …be ye therefore wise as serpents…
                                                                                            - Mat. 10:16 (KJV)

This is a revealing “piece” to our ‘puzzle’ of
Mystery Babylon. Ancient interpreters of the Bible often tried to
portray that, somehow, the Serpent was an actual
snake, failing to explain how a snake could use his vocal
cords and talk, as well as carry on an intelligent, rational conversation with a human being. They failed to
realize this serpent, and all of its pertinent information in the Bible (and other sources), were actually
referring to a terrestrial, human-like angelic being - of great wisdom.
What this gives us is a lot of information about this particular group of terrestrial, human-like angels. They
could have taken, or been in, a similar form as any other human being around, and/or lived just like them.
Although some aspects of their appearance might have been outwardly noticeable, their most significant
traits revolved around their superior
mental faculties. The Serpent of the Garden, at least in the Bible,
was called “Nachash” because he possessed good number of
mental attributes and skills. He had a
repertoire of “other-worldly,” occult knowledge; most of it, probably, from his understanding of the world
before Adam!

This angel probably became important to God because of his unique fortitude. God may have even intend-
ed to allow Sammael dominion over this current world, at least until Adam was created! What made God
change his mind?
Well, God may have understood there was something going on inside him which was very wrong.[12]
With all of his power and recognition, a good amount of
pride also may have begun to develop.[13] All of
it may have “gone to his head.”
God knew what was going on inside his heart, even if the rest of the angels did not, and He made His
decision. As most of us could guess, as soon as God decided to place a human being as leader of the
Garden, and not Sammael, this would have made him rebel in a major way. Soon, he would try to do
anything he could to try to make Adam seem unworthy - only to be given new titles such as “The Accuser
of the brethren,” or Satan.
We shall see how, even the meaning of the name
Sammael would change: "Samma - el" would soon be
thought of as “
the poison - of God,” because he would be one of those primarily responsible for poison-
ing the minds of all human beings under Adam’s authority!

The 'Wise' Serpent

As we know, there was probably more than one serpent around at this time. There was said to be at
least 50 Nephilim angels who worked around the Garden of Eden, and these could also be classified as
"serpents."[14] The one Serpent of Genesis was probably one of these Nephilim; more likely, a leader of
them. The Nephilim could have other names, such as
Anunnaki or Jinn. Whatever their name, these
terrestrial, earth-dwelling angels were among the top keepers of Paradise, under Adam.[15] The Serpent,
as well as those other 50 Nephilim serpents, could have also had important roles in the world before
Adam; that’s why they were brought back by God, again, into this world, to do much of their same,
previous work.[16]

We see evidence of this in the Garden of Eden: considering any possibility of an upstart in their establish-
ment at Eden, Adam and Eve were told by God to keep, or
guard, what they had. The Garden needed
guarding from any possible harm, disruption, or problems which might eventually befall it. Why? If the world
before the Fall was so perfect, as many speculate, then just
who or what would Adam and Eve have to
guard it from? God may have understood that our terrestrial “world” (our physical cosmos) would always
have imperfections, be incomplete, or flawed in some way. To compensate, God may have sent angels,
visible or invisible, to help things flow more smoothly; or to assist the human race. For whatever reason,
each “world” did not work out. According to the above authors, however, the terrestrial angels of our
former world were a huge part of the problem.

                                            The rebellion of the angels had caused the darkness.
                                                                                            (Armstrong, 1985, Part 10)[6]

We recall (in
Creation - the Gap & Deep) that, around the time of Genesis 1:2, God was ready to bring
human souls back from the previous world, and into the world of Adam. One important element of the
Garden may reside in what happened to some of the terrestrial
angels of this former world. Quite possibly,
a few of them could have been brought back into our current world, as well, by God, to assist mankind
once again! This gave them an extremely large advantage over any man, however, in this world:

               …in the grey dawn of history there were men who possessed the knowledge of God.
                                                                                                      (Bristowe, 1950, p. 8)[7]

If this was the case, where did ancient men get such information? Let's go one better: where would the
angelic Serpent of the Garden of Eden get all of his knowledge from? Quite possibly, these terrestrial
angels could have maintained a good deal of knowledge from the world before Adam. Could the Serpent
have his sly and seductive tactics because he understood how things worked in the world before Adam?
The scary part of this Garden story lies with the possibility that the two angelic forces of Adam’s corrupt-
ion - Satan (or Sammael) and the Serpent - both had an arsenal of occult knowledge, all of which came
from their understanding of how our planet works, as a whole - through these previous worlds! Let’s take
a quick look at these angels, and some possible advantages they may have had.

Sammael

It seemed there may have been two major angelic players of the world before Adam; leaders, actually.
The first,
Sammael, apparently, came out of the heavenly realm. According to one source, he was thought
to have been fashioned out of the “splendor of God himself,” or was “the firstborn" of heaven.[8] Simply put,
he was, at one time, one of the most important and powerful angels of God, an angel who once had a high
rank in heaven.
Sammael was also known thought to be a
Cherub (or military) angel.[9] He was no ordinary Cherub, how-
ever. Some traditions state Sammael had a major role in what happened to our previous world, as well. He
was known as the “
Angel of Death;” one who had “grim and destructive duties.” He was also known as
“one who disturbs the heaven and earth.”[10] What exactly did he do?

                 (God and His angels speaking)… we established him (Sammael) in command of all
                                        the armies which we created, and they all obey him.
                                                                          - Enthronement of the Archangel Michael[11]

It’s pretty easy to assume, with all of these titles, Sammael would have been a major instrument of the
previous world’s destruction. He could have even been the
lead angel, assigned by God, to carry out judg-
ment on this previous world. Sammael probably destroyed angels and humans alike - giving him the title,
“Angel of Death.” He took this gruesome task on in a serious way; somebody had to do it.
                                                                                                  Footnotes
[1]  Dan Gayman,
The Two Seeds of Genesis 3:15 (Daniel Lee Gayman, 1977), 15.  
[2]  Michael E. Stone,
Adamgirk: The Adam Book of Arak’el of Siwnik, 1.22.77 (Oxford: University Press, 2007), 218.
[3]  
3 Enoch (The Hebrew Book of Enoch), Chapter 44(6), trans. Hugo Odeberg (New York: KTAV Publishing House, Inc., 1973).
[4]  Abdul-Sahib Al-Hasani Al-amili,
The Prophets, Their Lives and Their Stories, 2, http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/pro/index.htm (accessed
Oct. 11, 2004).
[5]  Herbert W. Armstrong,
Mystery of the Ages, Part 8 (1985).
[6]  Herbert W. Armstrong,
Mystery of the Ages, Part 10 (1985).
[7]  E. S. G. Bristowe,
Cain - An Argument (Leicester: Edgar Backus, 1950), 8.
[8]  
Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html; Alan
Unterman,
Dictionary of Jewish Lore and Legend (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1991), 173.
[9]  Robert Graves and Raphael Patai,
Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964), 57;
Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (London: Darussalam, 2003), 27, 31; Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.
edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html.
[10]  
Samael, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samael (accessed 08/19/13); Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.
edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html.
[11]  
Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html.
[12]  Robert Graves and Raphael Patai,
Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964), 85.
[13]  
Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html.
[14]  Anonymous,
New Interpretation of a Portion of the Third Chapter of Genesis, Viewed in Connection With Other Parts of the Bible;
Including an Inquiry Into the Introduction, Nature, and Extent of Satanic Influence in the World
(London, J. Hatchard and Son, 1834), 53.
[15]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 91, 102.
[16]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 83, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 254.
[17]  Christian and Barbara Joy O’Brien,
The Shining Ones (Cirencester, England: Dianthus Publishing Limited, 1988), 65.
[18]  Andrew Collins,
From the Ashes of Angels (Rochester, Vermont: Bear & Company, 1996), 261.
[19]  Anonymous,
New Interpretation of a Portion of the Third Chapter of Genesis, Viewed in Connection With Other Parts of the Bible;
Including an Inquiry Into the Introduction, Nature, and Extent of Satanic Influence in the World
(London, J. Hatchard and Son, 1834), 53.
[20]  Christian and Barbara Joy O’Brien,
The Shining Ones (Cirencester, England: Dianthus Publishing Limited, 1988), 139, 142.
[21]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 82, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 253.
[22]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 102; The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Intro-
duction and From the Creation to the Flood
, The Story of Iblis, 83, trans. Franz Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 254.
[23]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 82, 83, trans.
Franz Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 253, 254.
[24]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 83, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 254.
[25]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 82, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 253.
[26]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 82, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 253-54.
[27]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 83, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 254; Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 110.
[28]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 110.
[29]  
The Book of the Cave of Treasures, 1, 4000.
[30]  S. Baring-Gould,
Legends of the Patriarchs and Prophets and Other Old Testament Characters (New York: American Book Ex-
change, 1881), 15.
[31]  Heise; Brian S. Wright,
Blood & Seed: What Really Happened in Eden (The American Biblical Institute of Holy Land Studies, 2010),
81.
[32]  
The Chronicles of Jerahmeel (The Hebrew Bible Historiale), 22(1), trans. M. Gaster, Ph. D. (London: The Royal Asiatic Society,
1899).
[33]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 21, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011); John
Skinner,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1956), 73, 88; St. Chrysostom, Homilies on
Genesis
, Homily 16, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011), 215; [ Wis 2:24 ];
211  1; Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 113.
[34]  C. A. Phifer,
Annals of the Earth (Chicago, Illinois: American Publishers Association, 1890).
[35]  
Disdain, dictionary.reference.com/browse/disdain.
[36]  
Gospel of Barnabas, 40.
[37]  Abdul-Sahib Al-Hasani Al-amili,
The Prophets, Their Lives and Their Stories, 1, http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/pro/index.htm
(accessed Oct. 11, 2004).
[38]  
Viceroy, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viceroy.
[39]  Abdul-Sahib Al-Hasani Al-amili,
The Prophets, Their Lives and Their Stories, 1, http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/pro/index.htm
(accessed Oct. 11, 2004).
[40]  
Enthronement of the Archangel Michael, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/vita/pericopes/Apocrypha/Cop.Enth.Mich.html.
[41]  Robert Graves and Raphael Patai,
Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964),
82.
[42]  Robert Graves and Raphael Patai,
Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964),
82.
[43]  Abdul-Sahib Al-Hasani Al-amili,
The Prophets, Their Lives and Their Stories, 3, http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/pro/index.htm
(accessed Oct. 11, 2004); Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (London: Darussalam, 2003), 17-18, 25; David Max Eichhorn, Cain: Son of
the Serpent
(New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 11; St. Ambrose, On Paradise, 21, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/
commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011); Howard Schwartz,
Tree of Souls: The Mythology of Judaism (Oxford: University Press,
2004), 133.
[44]  St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 12, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan.
12, 2011) 164.
[45]  
Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament Part I: Genesis - II Samuel, Translation and Collation 6b 7, trans. Martin Sprengling
and William Creighton Graham (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1931), 19.
[46]  Michael E. Stone,
Adamgirk: The Adam Book of Arak’el of Siwnik, 1.19.15 (Oxford: University Press, 2007), 197.
[47]  Michael E. Stone,
Adamgirk: The Adam Book of Arak’el of Siwnik, 1.19.2 (Oxford: University Press, 2007), 196.
[48]  E. Basil Redlich,
The Early Traditions of Genesis (London: Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd., 1950), 79.
[49]  St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 12, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan.
12, 2011) 165.
[50]  Robert Graves and Raphael Patai,
Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964), 82.
[51]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 21, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011).
[52]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 21, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011).
[53]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 21, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011).
[54]  Ibn Ezra.
[55]  Ibn Ezra.
[56]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 85.
[57]  Christian and Barbara Joy O’Brien,
The Shining Ones (Cirencester, England: Dianthus Publishing Limited, 1988), 138.
[58]  Philo, (1W28).
[59]  Ronald H. Isaacs,
Legends of Biblical Heroes: A Sourcebook (Northvale, N. J.: Jason Aronson, Inc., 2002), 3; Peskita de Rav
Kahana 101.
[60]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 99, 104; Billie Brinkley, The Lost Books of the Bible: The
Supernatural
(Berkeley, California: Oracle Research Publishing, 2005), ; Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, The Traditions of the Jews,
Contained in the Talmud and Other Mystical Writings
(London: J. Robinson, 1748), Preface, 22; The Qur’an (), . (), 0.0, http://www.usc.
edu/schools/college/ (accessed , 20) Tafsir al-Jalalayn ; Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2009), 32.
[61]  Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2009), 32.
[62]  Ronald H. Isaacs,
Legends of Biblical Heroes: A Sourcebook (Northvale, N. J.: Jason Aronson, Inc., 2002), 3.
[63]  Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (London: Darussalam, 2003), 24.
[64]  
Perseverance, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perseverance, accessed 10/17/2013.
[65]  Ibn Kathir,
Stories of the Prophets (London: Darussalam, 2003), 25.
[66]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 2, 34.
[67]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Adam, 87, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 258.
[68]  
The Works of Philo Judaeus, Questions and Answers I, 5, trans. C. D. Yonge (London: H. G. Bohn, 1854-5).
[69]  S. G. F. Brandon,
Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1963), 124.
[70]  Howard Schwartz,
Tree of Souls: The Mythology of Judaism (Oxford: University Press, 2004), 136.
[71]  E. S. G. Bristowe,
Cain - An Argument (Leicester: Edgar Backus, 1950), 92.
[72]  Howard Schwartz,
Tree of Souls: The Mythology of Judaism (Oxford: University Press, 2004), 135.
[73]  E. S. G. Bristowe,
Cain - An Argument (Leicester: Edgar Backus, 1950), 91.
[74]  E. S. G. Bristowe,
Cain - An Argument (Leicester: Edgar Backus, 1950), 6.
[75]  
Intelligence, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence.
[76]  
Prudence, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prudence.
[77]  
Intelligence, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence.
[78]  
Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament Part I: Genesis - II Samuel, Translation and Collation, Folio 6b 7, trans. Martin
Sprengling and William Creighton Graham (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1931), 19.
[79]  James L. Kugel,
Traditions of the Bible (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1998), 113; The Book of Jubillees
3 3.
[80]  Johann Andreas Eisenmenger,
The Traditions of the Jews, Contained in the Talmud and Other Mystical Writings (London: J.
Robinson, 1748), 22.
[81]  St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 15, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan.
12, 2011) 201.
[82]  St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 15, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan.
12, 2011) 200.
[83]  Jayim Nahman Bialik and Yehoshua Hana Ravnitzky,
The Book of Legends (Sefer Ha-Aggadah): Legends of the Talmud and
Midrash
, 76 (New York: Shocken Books,.1992), 19.
[84]  Shira Halevi,
The Life Story of Adam and Havah, Genesis  (Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1997), 243.
[85]  
The Chronicles of Jerahmeel (The Hebrew Bible Historiale), 6(16), trans. M. Gaster, Ph. D. (London: The Royal Asiatic Society,
1899).
[86]  
Ah, http://www.dailywritingtips.com/ah-those-ah-words-in-english/ (08/19/13); Ah, http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_ah_mean
_in_hebrew (08/19/13).
[87]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 21.
[88]  
Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament Part I: Genesis - II Samuel, Translation and Collation, Folio 6a 28, trans. Martin
Sprengling and William Creighton Graham (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1931), 17.
[89]  Andrew Collins,
From the Ashes of Angels (Rochester, Vermont: Bear & Company, 1996), 151.
[90]  John Skinner,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1956), 66.
[91]  
The Book of the Bee, Chap. 13: On the Formation of Adam 2 02 10 (notes), trans. Earnest A. Wallis Budge, M. A., http://www.
sacred-texts.com/chr/bb/bb.htm (accessed Oct. 10, 2004); St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 14, http://www2.iath.virginia.
edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011) 184.
[92]  St. Chrysostom,
Homilies on Genesis, Homily 14, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/ChrGen.html (accessed Jan.
12, 2011) 184-85.
[93]  E. S. G. Bristowe,
Cain - An Argument (Leicester: Edgar Backus, 1950), 94.
[94]  St. Ephrem the Syrian:
Selected Prose Works, Section II 22(2), trans. Edward G. Mathews, Jr. and Joseph P. Amar (Washington,
D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1994), 114.
[95]  
The History of al-Tabari - Volume I: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, The Story of Iblis, 82-83, trans. Franz
Rosenthal (Albany: New York Press, 1989), 253-254.
[96]  
Saltair na Rann, 1193-1196, trans. David Greene.
[97]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 15.
[98]  St. Ephrem the Syrian:
Selected Prose Works, Section II 18, trans. Edward G. Mathews, Jr. and Joseph P. Amar (Washington, D. C.:
The Catholic University of America Press, 1994), 109.
[99]  Ibn Kathir,
The Story of Creation (Karachi, Pakistan: Darul Ishaat, 2006), 109.
[100]  
Saltair na Rann, 1781-1784, trans. David Greene.
[101]  
Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on the Creation, 77, trans. Michael Linetsky (Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc.,
1998).
[102]  Padraic Colum,
Orpheus, Myths of the World (1930), .
[103]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 22, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011).
[104]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 13-14.
[105]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 14.
[106]  St. Ambrose,
On Paradise, 22, http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anderson/commentaries/Amb.html (accessed Jan. 12, 2011).
[107]  David Max Eichhorn,
Cain: Son of the Serpent (New York: Whittier Books, Inc., 1957), 17.