So after researching this thing up and down for a decade or so i guess i finally got a personal winner.
The snake was Enki, the fruit was sex (and knowledge perhaps of what the purpose of man was to be).
So man was being created to work the field and be eaten (Eloi ending) like we use horses for. Enki fucked that up and therefore the descendants of the gods (inbred elites) wanted him depicted as a snake because he was to them.
The god of that story is most likely Anu or Enlil.
Enlil used to be against creation of mankind (which they created starting from hominid and their own dna, as slave and food). He was the guy who opted for the flood to stop the nuisance later on.
It's clear (to me) history is suppressed right now, and that the sumerian myths hold lots of truth. Yes i know Sitchin is most likely an illuminati plant and he put some incorrectness in there for his other mates to call it all fake and discredit the whole story.
Enki was the only humanist among the 'gods' who wanted his creation to have a personal path aside mere slavery. Others just wanted slaves and decent food.
I was first put on the suspect this was the case when i read a jewish forum a decade or so ago where jewish scholars were confirming the two different dna story was real, meaning they know well their foundational myths and their real value but they are happy for others to believe in the christian understanding of the old testament.
An important side conclusion is to me that not even the elohim were good enough to make their own food in a lab, but needed to make it into a lifeform.
Another thing is that Enki was lord of the abyss and 'god' of wisdom. What does Jesus say of snakes? be wise as one. It seems a pretty easy take that that wasn't referencing an actual snake, but snakes got into the wisdom thing because of Enki portrayal in the story.
It's not the first reset since then and that's why i think one should entertain the idea the book was heavily modified since way before the greek translations.
I don't mean to offend anyone religious feelings but i just wanted some feedback on my own view.
Nice reasons not to answer. You got definitions, wow. Nothing new. Picture me impressed.
Oh yeah, picture: blablabla. Or will it be impressions?
Utilizing implication (if/then) over reason (vs) avoids conflicts like naughty vs nice or nothing vs everything or answer vs question.
Definition implies DEAF PHONETICIAN aka one who is deaf to sound (phonic) when consenting to words.
For example...suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore perceivable in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound). That's how spell-craft works.
a) Nothing represents ones de-nial (nihilo; nothing) of everything perceivable, hence a jew suggesting gentiles to believe in "nothing"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQnaRtNMGMI
b) New/néwos - "now"...as perception within perceivable; one can only have presence NOW...not before (old) or after (new). Few suggest "new" to tempt many to ignore "now".
a) A suggested picture implies a captured moment, which in return tempts one to ignore perceivable moment-um of ongoing motion. Movies aka moving pictures are then artificially moving captured moments.
Few suggest actors under directors to distract many from discerning self as reactions (life) during direction (inception towards death).
b) Blablabla aka yadayadayada is a yiddish expression for "so on; and so forth" aka suggested progressivism tempting consenting gentiles to move forwards.
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6t8g6ka4W0 Notice the differentiation of shapes (life) during the same base line (inception towards death).
Nature impresses...
Hunger and thirst represent pressure (press) for each being within (im), hence natural law impressing (dying) expressions (living) simultaneously.