The Seed of the Serpent and the Seed of the Woman in the Standard Works

Abstract: The curse of the serpent in Genesis 3:15 is presented as an archetype for the battle between good and evil. An ancient Hebrew literary form that ties together multiple stories through a common set of images, situations, repeated words, and phrases, is termed a leitmotif. A biblical leitmotif based on the curse of the serpent in Genesis 3 and the curse of Cain in Genesis 4 is found throughout both the Old and New Testaments and is referred to as the seed of the serpent leitmotif. Hebrew prophets, early Christians, and protestant reformers all found the seed of the serpent leitmotif to be a compelling theme containing prophecies about the coming of the Messiah and the ultimate destruction of the wicked. Writers in the Book of Mormon and other Restoration scriptures appear to have used the same seed of the serpent leitmotif to clearly identify the protagonist of a given story as the true seed of the woman and to brand the antagonist of the story as the seed of the serpent. The paper begins with a discussion of the leitmotif in Genesis. It then extends to the rest of the Bible, using the story of Abimelech as an archetype. Following this foundation, it then shows how the leitmotif occurs in a variety of sermons and stories throughout the standard works and, in particular, the Book of Mormon. The paper concludes with a discussion of the explanatory power of this literary device for the understanding and edification of modern-day readers.

There is a brief story found in Genesis 3 whose fantastical elements such as a talking snake may seem so incredible to some that it has often been dismissed as a simple-minded, pre-scientific explanation for the origin of snakes, similar to what is found in Aesop’s fables or [Page 2]the “Just So Stories” from Rudyard Kipling.[1] Others see in this story nothing more than an etiological explanation of the natural human horror of serpents.[2] We might term these points of view the “naturalistic” explanations of the story of the serpent. A school of thought that is consistent with the doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints suggests that the story of the serpent contains both literal and allegorical elements that include essential theological lessons and applications for us. The ancient Hebrews found this story so compelling that for them it became a pervasive representation of the battle between good and evil being fought across the ages, with the wicked minions of the seed of the serpent arrayed against the righteous followers of the seed of the woman.[3]

Among those who accept the story as scriptural, there has been nearly as much disagreement as with those who dismiss the story as simple mythology. Some believe it requisite with their faith to accept the story literally,[4] while others believe it is only an allegory.[5] Some say that the snake was an actual talking animal, while others suggest that it was a representation of Lucifer, a fallen angel who had been stripped of much of his power and abilities as a punishment for rebellion.[6] Some believe that Eve was at best naïve, and at worst wicked, as she deceived her husband and partook of the fruit, others that she consciously made a wise decision that put the plan of redemption into effect.[7] Those who have found in the story of the seed of the [Page 3]serpent a framework to interpret the battle between good and evil have noted that the continuity between the first five chapters of Genesis and beyond disrupts the broadly accepted source critical theories in which certain of these chapters are attributed to different authors at different time periods.[8]

Despite these disagreements about even the most basic elements of this story, one view that became popular among early Christians, and that has persisted for millennia, is one that finds in this story the ultimate promise of a messiah whose advent was prophesied to ultimately crush the head of a metaphorical serpent, thus triumphing once and for all over the devil. Those who take this view of the story in Genesis 3 call it the Protoevangelium, a word coined by Martin Luther to encapsulate the notion that this earliest promise of a messiah is a prototypical version of the evangelical “good news.”[9]

While Latter-day Saints also see in this story the promise of a messiah,[10] it has primarily been used to frame the struggle between the righteous and the wicked, most notably in the temple ceremony that is at the heart of Latter-day Saint worship and theology. It is noteworthy that in addition to the version of the story enacted in the temple, an additional unique version of this story is also found in the Pearl of Great Price, complete with extensive commentary about the roles of the characters involved and the theological issues addressed therein. Together with the commentary on the stories of Adam and Eve as well as Cain and Abel found in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants, it is safe to say that this story is one of the most influential stories found throughout the body of scripture.

Leitmotif and Leitwort as Rhetorical Devices

Before proceeding, we need a better understanding of the methods and techniques ancient Hebrew authors used to encode and transmit information because this Bible story, and many others, depend on “a referential terrain that we no longer share with the source material. . . . [T]he words we’re reading come from a world that diverges from ours because it belongs to a foreign way of life, to a place that is far away, or to a time that is long past.”[11]

One literary concept I will use extensively in this article is that of [Page 4]the motif. A motif is a rhetorical pattern that is repeated across two or more stories. Motifs make use of symbolism, imagery, and word patterns to connect stories that the author means for the reader to examine in parallel. Robert Alter has identified several different types of parallels present throughout the Hebrew Bible such as sequence of actions, type-scenes, and what I will call lead-words (sometimes termed leitwort). Such elements are often used to build themes or motifs. To many biblical scholars, what transforms a motif into a leitmotif is the repetition of lead-words that “lead” the reader to another scriptural passage where the same word or set of words also feature prominently. Robert Alter notes that:

[The lead] word-motif, as a good many commentators have recognized, is one of the most common features of the narrative art of the Bible. But in Biblical prose, the reiteration of key words has been formalized into a prominent convention that is made to play a much more central role in the development of thematic argument than does the repetition of such key words in other narrative traditions.[12]

Yairah Amit clearly explained the technique of identifying passages of scripture with a rhetorical relationship based on lead-words:

One story is linked to another . . . by words that are repeated in both of them and which are uncommon in their surroundings . . . the leading words . . . are the mortar which bind the stones together into a single edifice.[13]

Noel Reynolds has identified levels of intentional structure in Hebrew scripture ranging from low levels with pairs of matching words or phrases up to motifs that span multiple books of scripture and even larger rhetorical structures that unify vast swathes of scriptural passages.[14] Identifying lead-words that may be associated with a given motif makes it easier to identify other instances of the motif. In this paper, I identify a specific motif that has a unique set of themes [Page 5]and imagery associated with it. I use the concept of lead-words to help identify different stories in which this motif is used. I will begin with the identification of this motif in the Bible, and then move on to identify instances of the same motif in the Book of Mormon.

Four important terms used in this paper are:

1. A leitmotif: a narrative that incorporates multiple elements such as repetition, lead-words, summary statements, the arrangement of units, intercalations, and the editing of known material in two or more different stories to facilitate the comparison of those stories.

2. A leitwort or lead-word: a word, word-root, or phrase that recurs significantly in a text so that the reader is able to decipher or grasp the meaning of the text by noting these repetitions as an aid to understanding the theme of the text.

3. The seed of the woman: the divinely sanctioned protagonist of a story who hears the word of the Lord, repents, and follows his commandments. The archetype of the seed of the woman is Jesus Christ, but all those who hearken to the prophets, believe that the Lord will redeem his people, and publish peace and salvation are the seed of the woman.

4. The seed of the serpent: the antagonist of a story who rebels against the Lord or his appointed servants. The seed of the serpent is willing to kill even his own kin in the pursuit of wealth or dominion. Lies, betrayal, and murder are the hallmarks of the seed of the serpent, as are qualities attributed to serpents such as cunning and lying in ambush. The seed of the serpent is cursed and as part of the fulfillment of that curse ends up getting trampled or having his head crushed.

Due to the fact that ancient scriptures have been translated into modern languages, there may be some variation in the exact form that a lead-word takes.[15] For example, the words or phrases, kill, slay, [Page 6]take away life, die, and destroy may all represent substantially the same lead-word when found in conjunction with the other lead-words that constitute a given leitmotif. Jonathan Cheek shows that various English translations of the Hebrew word שׁוּף used in Genesis 3:15 include break, crush, bruise, strike, destroy, batter, fall on, and so on.[16]

The way in which a lead-word is used in a narrative is to first capture the attention of readers by repeating the word in a significant way in a passage of scripture. Once the readers’ attention is captured, they may be prompted to recall a related passage of scripture that uses the same word in a similar way. This creates an intertextual linkage between the two passages of scripture in a way that allows the reader to draw new conclusions. Robert Alter gives the following example:

The confrontation between Samuel and Saul over the King’s failure to destroy all of the Amalekites and all of their possessions (1 Samuel 15) is woven out of a series of variations on the key terms “listen,” “voice,” “word.” Samuel begins by enjoining Saul to listen to the voice of God; When the king returns victorious from battle, the prophet is dismayed by the voice (or sound, qol) of the sheep and the voice of cattle that he hears. Thundering denunciation in verse, he tells Saul that what the Lord wants is “listening to the voice of the LORD, / for listening is better than sacrifice, / hearkening, than the fat of rams” (1 Samuel 15: 22); and a contrite Saul apologizes that he has transgressed the word of the LORD and instead listened to the voice of the people.[17]

The lead-words listen, voice, and word are repeated in a way that stands out in the story, and they lead to other stories in which listening to the voice or word of the Lord features as a prominent theme.[18] Lead-words are used prominently in the stories of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel.[19] Hendel notes that the lead-words rule and desire link the Adam and Eve story to the story of Cain. He says:

[Page 7]Cain is caught in the conflict between his own desire—kindled by jealousy and anger—and his moral self-governance. The verbal and thematic linkages of desire and rule place Eve and Cain in a complicated analogy, as subjects addressed by Yahweh regarding the difficult consequences of their moral choices.[20]

Hendel also sees curse as a lead-word tying these two stories together:

The curses on the snake and the soil in the Garden of Eden story verbally recur in the curse of Cain. . . . The soil was cursed because of man, now Cain is cursed in relation to the soil. The reversal of subject and object in [Genesis] 3:17 and 4:11 makes an artful link in the painful relationship between man and the soil, now stained by a brother’s blood.[21]

The use of the lead-words rule, desire, and curse as they relate to Cain, and the detail of Abel’s blood that was spilled on the ground will all be of great interest a bit later on as I examine an application of the seed of the serpent motif in a linked story.

Of course, there are other ways beside lead-words in which the authors of the Bible created linkages between passages of scriptures. Alter notes that “When one biblical story alludes to an earlier one, as often happens, clear textual signals are given in the citation of key words or phrases, sometimes even whole statements, from the antecedent story.”[22] Alan Goff explains that another way to generate intertextual connections includes “genres defined by conventional narratives that can be used over and over as a template.”[23]

These methods of intertextual linkage can be found in conjunction with iterations of the seed of the serpent stories throughout the Bible. Most obvious in its applicability to the seed of the serpent are [Page 8]conventional narratives that are used over and over as a template and allusions when one text covertly refers to another.

The Seed Motif in the Bible

One focus of this paper is to examine the motif of the seed of the serpent or the seed of the woman within the Book of Mormon and other Restoration scriptures.[24] Before doing that, however, it is necessary to develop how the “seed motif” is presented and understood in the books of the Bible. I will present a brief overview of biblical commentary from scholars outside The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and how they have applied the seed motif to their discussions. I will use one particular story as an example of the seed motif in the Old Testament. Later, in the second half of the paper, I will return to the original focus of this essay as I attempt to demonstrate that this same motif is brought to bear on stories and events in the Book of Mormon.

The seed motif in Genesis 3

The story in Genesis 3 opens with the cunning serpent attempting to get Eve to eat the fruit of the tree of life in contravention to the commandment of God. The serpent says that if she eats the fruit she will not surely die (as God warned her) but will instead become like God, knowing good and evil:

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (Genesis 3:1–5)

The serpent successfully convinces Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, who then convinces Adam to do the same. When God asks Adam, Eve, and the serpent to each explain themselves, the serpent ends up [Page 9]receiving a curse for his part in convincing Adam and Eve to do what they had been commanded not to do. For our purposes, what is said to the serpent is the most important part of the story:

And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. (Genesis 3:14–15)

A vast body of commentary on the curse of the serpent and its meaning has accrued throughout the ages. Early Christian commentators referred to this theme when trying to win converts,[25] condemn the actions of Gentile antagonists,[26] or justify attitudes toward heretics.[27] The vignettes below illustrate how just a few of the many biblical scholars outside our faith tradition have viewed this narrative. I give a short quotation from a variety of viewpoints below followed by a brief comment that explains the relation of the comment to the seed of the serpent motif.

Rosenbaum notes that:

Protestant tradition sees Jesus as the ultimate “he” in [Genesis] 3:15. The Catholic tradition elevates Mary to equal status here and, indeed, visitors to Catholic churches can often find statuary depicting Mary treading upon a serpent. Understandably, Jewish tradition has no use for either of these ideas.”[28]

The identity of the seed of the woman is of great interest to many commentators. Some see this as a reference to all humankind (all the children of Eve), but to others it refers specifically to the seed of only the woman (and not the man) as a reference to Jesus Christ. In this article the reference will be taken as applying to all those who choose the plan of God, as opposed to those who choose to follow Satan, [Page 10]with Christ as the archetype of those who choose to follow God. While Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish traditions all view the curse on the serpent and the promise concerning the seed of the woman as highly significant, there is a great deal of divergence of what that significance might be. One Catholic commentator interprets the passage as follows:

In the broadest sense, the Church as a whole is Eve’s seed. . . . In addition, the Catholic Church has long seen Eve’s seed as referring to the Messiah, Jesus Christ, who conquers over sin, Satan and death through his one Sacrifice of Calvary . . . Mary is understood as the “New Eve,” bearing the Redeemer of the world . . . whereas the first Eve failed to trust and obey God.”[29]

In this interpretation, a theme developed in the story is a conflict between good and evil that results in a trampling, or head-crushing, outcome for the seed of the serpent. Briggs suggests that the story encompasses all of human history and represents the continuous battle between good and evil:

The term seed is a generic term for the entire race of descendants of the woman on the one hand and the serpent on the other. . . . There are those who by birthright belong to the seed of the woman who become by apostasy the children of the serpent. There are also those who are won as trophies of grace from the seed of the serpent and are adopted into the seed of redemption. These two great forces are in conflict throughout history.[30]

In Briggs’s view, one is not necessarily always seed of the serpent or always seed of the woman, but one can move from one designation to the other based on the choices one makes. This view of things fits in well with the Latter-day Saint view of agency, a viewpoint Mormon articulated well when he explained that “even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation” (Alma 3:19) and that “Every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey” [Page 11](Alma 3:27). Wenham confirms the antiquity of the story and some of the early interpretations of the seed motif serving as a pattern for the battle between good and evil.[31]

Some interpretations of this story see highly significant symbolism in certain Bible stories in which a character acts in a serpentine fashion, such as lying in wait to ambush an opponent. Verrett and other commentators also see in the story of the serpent a conflict over who has the right to rule on earth.[32]

The Latter-day Saint view of the definition of the dominion granted to men and women includes the idea that the eternal destiny of men and women who follow the Lord is to be granted ever-increasing levels of responsibility, thus exercising the dominion and responsibility God gave them.[33] The contrast between those who are granted dominion by divine decree compared to those who follow Satan (who claims to be the god of this world) is shown starkly in the book of Moses. In that revelatory work, Adam and Eve are given “dominion over the fishes of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Moses 2:26). The right of Adam to exercise dominion is renewed after he leaves the Garden of Eden (Moses 5:1). However, Satan opposes Adam and his seed and exercises dominion over those who submit their will to him (Moses 6:15). In fact, Satan sought for dominion long before the Lord granted Adam dominion over the earth (Moses 4:1), and this ambition for unrighteous dominion is what led to his rebellion and fall so that “he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice” (Moses 4:4). The issue of who holds the right of dominion continues to be disputed, with the seed of the serpent choosing Satan to rule over them while the seed of the woman hearkens to the voice of God and repents (Moses 6:1).

Beyond these views of the interpretation of Genesis 3:15, there are still other diverging opinions. Some assign the story to a much later date. They interpret the story in terms of political infighting or cultural [Page 12]developments within Israel. These latter views include a proposal that the crushing of the serpent was associated with Hezekiah’s reforms and the destruction of the bronze serpent mentioned in 2 Kings 18:4[34] or as a criticism of the internationalism adopted by Solomon, with the serpent representing surrounding pagan religions.[35] However, these historico-political interpretations, as well as the naturalistic interpretation suffer from a lack of explanatory power when viewed in terms of the recurring pattern of the seed of the serpent that is seen in Genesis 4. These patterns also appear many times in subsequent stories and in the Book of Mormon, as will be shown below.

The seed motif in Genesis 4

As interesting as the various nuances of the story in Genesis chapter 3 might be, what makes it of interest for our purposes is first seen in Genesis 4. In that chapter, the curse on the serpent and the enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman are taken as a template for the interactions that occur between Cain and Abel. Smith notes that “There are important parallels between the fall and the very next chapter in Genesis, the sad story of Cain and Abel, with over a dozen thematic and verbal similarities.”[36]

The seed of the serpent rejects the counsel of the Lord

If Cain had remained faithful, no doubt it would have been written of him that he was in the image of his father, with all the likenesses that entails, just as it was written of Adam that he was in the likeness and image of God, and of Seth that he was in the likeness and image of Adam (Genesis 5:1–3). But Cain’s arrogance prevented him from taking correction when his sacrifice was rejected:

And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. (Genesis 4:6–7)

Cain was angry because his sacrifice was rejected, but the mild [Page 13]rebuke of the Lord suggests that he could still make a correction in his behavior and remain in God’s good graces. It was not too late. However, God also warned him that “sin lieth at the door.” Cain had to decide whether or not he would yield to the influence of the devil or accept God’s correction, humble himself, and repent.

The seed of the serpent behaves in serpentine fashion

Wenham sees serpentine imagery in these verses, with the idea being that the serpent was lying in ambush at the door, waiting to grab hold of Cain.[37] With effort, Cain could even now avoid the danger. In the King James version of the Bible this imagery is not particularly compelling, but other translations make the serpentine imagery much more obvious. For example, the Message Bible renders this verse: “If you do well, won’t you be accepted? And if you don’t do well, sin is lying in wait for you, ready to pounce; it’s out to get you, you’ve got to master it.” Other translations render the relevant passage “sin is crouching at your door” (NIV), “sin is lurking at the door” (NRS), “sin is couching at the door” (RSV)[38] or in similar terms that suggest sin is a waiting beast. Cain, however, refused to make the effort to change and ended up rebelling against God and embracing the serpent. John Ronning notes that:

Cain is actually, in the beginning of the chapter, apparently like his father Adam, a farmer, while Abel is different. . . . Yet at the end of the story we see Cain unlike his natural parents, and quite like his spiritual father the serpent. The . . . difference in the offerings turns out to be symptomatic of the difference between righteous Abel and lying, murdering Cain.[39]

Besides identifying the influence of the serpent in the story, Ronning notes that the story of Cain and Abel provides an interpretive key to the enmity reference:

Identifying the enmity which occurs in Genesis 4 as the enmity predicted in Gen 3:15 is the key to identifying the two seeds which are at enmity, with the result that the initial [Page 14]interpretation of Gen 3:15 by Adam and Eve, the naturalistic interpretation, is overthrown. . . . The two seeds therefore are not snakes and humans, but two kinds of humans—in fact, here, brothers, so those who argued for a definition of seed as moral or ethical kind are correct.[40]

The seed of the serpent focuses on this life only

While the case for the story of Cain and Abel fulfilling the prophecy in Genesis 3:15 can be made based on the common elements highlighted above, there is a problem here as well. The seed of the serpent is supposed to be vanquished and the seed of the woman to triumph, and yet Abel is killed. How can Abel be the seed of the woman when he is overcome by Cain? And how can Cain be the seed of the serpent when he goes on to lead an apparently long life after committing murder? Isn’t the seed of the woman supposed to triumph while the seed of the serpent has his head bruised? Ronning points out that:

The wicked interpret history and Scripture according to outward appearances, disregarding the promise and threat of God by assuming that they only pertain to this life, where in fact they are not fulfilled. . . . We have seen overwhelming evidence that Gen 3:15 . . . must have its ultimate fulfillment beyond this existence. This is the solution to the paradox of Gen 3:15 being a curse on the wicked, a blessing to the righteous, while at the same time indicating that the righteous may suffer fatal defeat.[41]

This focus on the here-and-now, especially in taking murderous action in order to obtain short-term gain or dominion, is an attribute that is associated with the seed of the serpent. As the first occurrence of fulfillment of the curse on the serpent, the story of Cain and Abel provides a lens through which later fulfillments of the curse can be viewed.

Ronning, Dempster, and others see a recurring pattern of creation, exile, and return associated with the seed motif.[42] The stories of Noah [Page 15]and Abraham feature a destruction of the wicked and a new covenant made with their righteous descendants, while they also have unrighteous descendants who reject that covenant. The recurring pattern also includes the notion of people being driven out or exiled. Examples of this are Adam and Eve being driven from the garden, Cain being driven out as a fugitive and vagabond, Hagar and Ishmael being driven out, and so on. Two questions that recur in these patterns are:

- Who has the right to rule?

- What happens when individuals resist divine dominion and rebel against God?

In the story of the serpent in Genesis 3, Dempster sees the primary focus as the question of who will have dominion or power: the divinely-appointed representative of God, or the serpent? In Genesis 4, he notes that Cain as the elder has the right of rule if he reconciles himself to God, but Cain willingly submits to the dominion of the serpent.[43]

The question of whether the people will let God prevail,[44] or will submit to the rule of the serpent, is one of the major themes encompassed in the motif. It is raised over and over again in many Old Testament accounts. Hamilton identifies instances of the seed of the serpent in the law (Balaam), in the prophets (Sisera, Abimelech, Isaiah, Jeremiah), and in the writings (Psalms). He includes many examples of classifying various biblical antagonists as the seed of the serpent based on traits they share with both Cain and the primordial serpent.[45]

The seed of the serpent seeks to bring the seed of the woman into bondage

While the stories in Genesis 3 and 4 do not deal with the concept of bondage, later iterations of the theme do seem to contain this concept. Ronning explains:

In later fulfillments of Gen 3:15 we will see that Ishmael corresponds to Cain, as Isaac corresponds to Abel. In Gen 25:19 Isaac is called simply “the son of Abraham” (v. 19), while Ishmael is called . . . “the son of Hagar, the Egyptian,” and [Page 16]Sarah says to Abraham, “drive out this slave girl and her son” [Genesis 21:10]. . . . “Slave” is an apt designation for one who is the seed of the serpent, since the animals are to be ruled over by the seed of the woman. In the first few verses of chapter 4, then, we see the themes of creation and dominion which we used to interpret Gen 3:15 in our preliminary exegesis of that verse.[46]

The theme of bondage or servitude is explored in greater detail in other instances of the seed motif including Canaan, Jacob and Esau, Joseph in Egypt, and especially Moses and Pharaoh.[47]

The seed of the serpent kills for gain or power

Matthew Bowen explains that Cain’s name “is etiologically tied to the verb qny, denoting ‘get,’ ‘acquire.’”[48] Bowen notes instances of wordplay associated with Cain’s name and the concept of acquisition, a concept that is picked up on and amplified by other authors. Cain committed murder not just because he was angry or ashamed but because he was acquisitive and could kill his brother to gain his flocks. In this behavior, Cain sets the pattern for the seed of the serpent in his willingness to kill for gain, although other seed of the serpent kill for power instead.

Ronning notes that Cain is clearly like the serpent and unlike his parents. To his lying, murdering, and receiving a curse, we could add that Cain deliberately came out in open rebellion against both his father and God by offering a sacrifice (likely deliberately) that ignored the symbolic meaning of the sacrifice of the son of God and rejecting the warning of the Lord to repent. In Genesis 3 Adam and Eve are portrayed as consciously disobeying a commandment of God, acting at the urging of the serpent.

Indeed, in this instance there is an important dichotomy between how Adam, and especially Eve, are viewed by the majority of Christianity and how they are viewed in Latter-day Saint doctrine. Julie Smith has made an in-depth study of this topic and finds no way to harmonize the four different narrations of Eve’s choice in Latter-day Saint doctrine (to determine whether it was wise, neutral, or sinful). She concludes:

[Page 17]That if the goal had been to remove the tension, at least one of the four accounts would have done it; the fact that the tension remains weighs in favor of reading it as intentional. Biblical scholar Robert Alter suggests that Genesis 3 is a carefully designed work, purposefully presenting the audience with multiple, incompatible viewpoints because that is the best way to tell a story about a world composed of incompatible facets, a world where truths are in tension.[49]

The consistency of the seed motif requires that the choice at the center of the story be a sinful one. As Hamilton notes, the seed of the serpent pattern includes rebellion against the commands or laws of God.[50] We might propose that the sinful choice was that of the serpent who acted to frustrate the plan of God (Moses 4:4), but the structure of the story places Eve’s decision at the heart of the narrative, and as Smith observes:

Ultimately, there are only four characters—God, the serpent, Adam, and Eve—upon whom blame (if “blame” is indeed what we have here) can be bestowed. Yet neither individually nor in any combination can an adequate apportioning of blame be made.[51]

An in-depth analysis of Eve’s choice is beyond the scope of the present study, so I will defer the question and observe only that we may argue many different points of view, and that ultimately, the commandment of God not to partake of the fruit creates a clear tension in the story. The decision by Adam and Eve to partake, despite God’s warning not to do so, and then to try and hide from God, is sufficient for our purposes to establish the pattern in Genesis 3 that is followed in the seed motif thereafter.

The seed of the serpent is cursed and marked

Because of his murder of Abel, Cain is “cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand; When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth (Genesis 4:11–12). Avram Shannon notes that:

[Page 18]Cain was no longer able to perform the agricultural farm labor that had been his livelihood until that point. . . . Whereas the ground is cursed because of Adam such that he needs to work hard to get food from it, Cain is cursed from off the ground such that no matter how hard he works, he will not be able to induce the ground to produce food.[52]

Spilling blood upon the ground with the result of the earth refusing to yield crops is a concept that appears elsewhere in the scriptures. It was a curse that Cain found so terrible that he complained “My punishment is greater than I can bear.” The result of the curse is that Cain became a fugitive and a vagabond, and he feared that anyone he encountered would kill him. The Lord appears to have taken pity on him and marked him, perhaps in order to avoid blood feuds and a series of retribution killings. While various theories about what the mark consisted of (ranging from dark skin to a mark on his forehead to a shaking body), Bowen and Schade say that “the mark was to remind people to leave judgment to the Lord, who would deal with Cain on his own terms.”[53]

A great deal of discussion of the seed motif throughout the Old Testament can be found in Ronning, Verrett, and others. Rather than examining each of the many examples they discuss, I will cover a single example from the Old Testament in some detail before turning to the main topic of this paper, which is the seed motif in the Book of Mormon and other Restoration scriptures. The story of Abimelech in the book of Judges will serve as an archetype of the pattern that is seen in many stories in the Old Testament.

The seed motif in the story of Abimelech

Judges 9 opens with the story of Abimelech, the son of the great Hebrew judge, Gideon (also known as Jerubbaal). Abimelech proposes to the men of Shechem, who are related to him on his mother’s side, that they assist him in the murder of seventy of his own brothers, the sons of his father:

[Page 19]And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying, Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? remember also that I am your bone and your flesh. (Judges 9:1–2)

Here we see one attribute of the seed of the serpent, that of willingness to murder his own kin for wealth or power. The men of Shechem are amenable, and Abimelech proceeds to hire assassins using money the men of Shechem supplied:

And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, which followed him. And he went unto his father’s house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal. (Judges 9:4–5)

However, one of his seventy brothers, Jotham, escapes: “Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself” (Judges 9:5). Abimelech’s focus on short-term gain apparently paid off, and just as was the case with Cain killing Abel, it appears that the seed of the serpent had triumphed: With the help of the men of Shechem, Abimelech was made king: “And all the men of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo, and went, and made Abimelech king, by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem” (Judgers 9:6).

Jotham cursed both Abimelech and the men of Shechem saying:

Let fire come out from Abimelech, and devour the men of Shechem, and the house of Millo; and let fire come out from the men of Shechem, and from the house of Millo, and devour Abimelech. (Judges 9:20)

Being cursed for their wicked behavior is another of the attributes of the seed of the serpent. As the curse takes hold, Abimelech and the men of Shechem separately proceeded to engage in serpentine behavior by dealing treacherously, setting ambushes, and lying in wait for their enemies. First there was a falling out between the men of Shechem and Abimelech:

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously [Page 20]with Abimelech: That the cruelty done to the threescore and ten sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother, which slew them; and upon the men of Shechem, which aided him in the killing of his brethren. (Judges 9:23–24)

Then “the men of Shechem set liers in wait for him in the top of the mountains, and they robbed all that came along that way by them: and it was told Abimelech” (Judges 9:25).

Abimelech showed that he could engage in serpentine behavior as well by laying an ambush at night: “And Abimelech rose up, and all the people that were with him, by night, and they laid wait against Shechem in four companies” (Judges 9:34). As I have noted, acting at night and laying ambushes are behaviors associated with the seed of the serpent.

The story reached its climax as Abimelech and his army faced the men of Shechem in battle. The men of Shechem fled to a defensive tower, and Abimelech continued on to literally fulfill Jotham’s curse by burning the men of Shechem:

Abimelech took an axe in his hand, and cut down a bough from the trees, and took it, and laid it on his shoulder, and said unto the people that were with him, What ye have seen me do, make haste, and do as I have done. And all the people likewise cut down every man his bough, and followed Abimelech, and put them to the hold, and set the hold on fire upon them; so that all the men of the tower of Shechem died also, about a thousand men and women (Judges 9:48–49).

We should keep in mind that all of these people of Shechem who died were “flesh and bone” of Abimelech, so the tendency of the serpent to murder his own kin is redoubled in this story. Despite all of the blood that had been spilled, Abimelech wasn’t finished yet. After dealing with Shechem he moved on to Thebez, took the city, and needed only to reduce the tower to finish off his conquest:

And Abimelech came unto the tower, and fought against it, and went hard unto the door of the tower to burn it with fire. And a certain woman cast a piece of a millstone upon Abimelech’s head, and all to brake his skull. Then he called hastily unto the young man his armourbearer, and said unto him, Draw thy sword, and slay me, that men say not of me, A woman slew him. And his young man thrust him through, [Page 21]and he died. And when the men of Israel saw that Abimelech was dead, they departed every man unto his place. Thus God rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren: And all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads: and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jerubbaal, (Judges 9:51–57).

Of course, having one’s skull crushed is one of the most important attributes of the seed of the serpent story. Hamilton notes that:

Along with the broken heads of broken enemies who are trodden underfoot and lick dust, there are several references in the OT to serpentine foes whom Yahweh has pierced, broken, crushed, or otherwise defeated.[54]

The author of Judges added a postscript to the story to let the reader know that Abimelech’s demise was a direct result of the curse of Jotham and that the curse came because of the “wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren.” Also of interest in this story is the poetic justice in the fulfillment of Jotham’s prophecy: the men of Shechem embraced the serpentine suggestion of murder for power, and as frequently happens when dominion is yielded to the serpent (as when the men of Shechem yielded dominion to Abimelech in a bargain of murder for power), the result was destruction for all involved. Several stories of the seed of the serpent seem to feature such poetic justice.

The themes I have discussed associated with the seed of the serpent that are seen in this story include:

- The murder of Abimelech’s paternal brothers and other maternal relatives in order to achieve power.

- The question of dominion (the rightful heir of Gideon or the ambitious Abimelech).

- Serpentine behavior (lying in wait, treachery, acting by night).

- The action of a curse (when Jotham curses the men of Shechem and Abimelech)

- A broken (or crushed) head.

Based on the template developed in Genesis 4, when these thematic elements begin to appear, the reader can anticipate the direction that the story will take. There are also additional elements of [Page 22]intertextual linkage that are present in this story. A specific unique phrase that is repeated several times in the story of Abimelech seems to have reference to a particular serpentine quality. Five times in the story of Abimelech we encounter variants of the phrase “lie in wait.” Three of these usages seem to occur as a lead-word in Judges 9:32–35:

Now therefore up by night, thou and the people that is with thee, and lie in wait in the field. . . . And Abimelech rose up, and all the people that were with him, by night, and they laid wait against Shechem in four companies. And Gaal the son of Ebed went out, and stood in the entering of the gate of the city: and Abimelech rose up, and the people that were with him, from lying in wait.

The Hebrew term that is translated into English as “lie in wait” is a good description for the ambush hunting approach of a serpent, and indeed, some translators of the Bible have also rendered the action of the serpent in Genesis 3:15 as “lie in wait.”[55] Umberto Cassuto in his commentary on the warning the Lord gives to Cain in Genesis 4 makes particular note of the Hebrew term used and says that, “it symbolizes the evil impulse; the analogy is that of an animal lying in wait for its prey.”[56]

Another unique phrase that stands out in the story of Abimelech, and that seems to refer to another text, is found in verse 2 when Abimelech tells the men of Shechem that “I am your bone and your flesh.” That appears to be intended to echo Genesis 2:23 when Adam says of Eve “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.”

As noted above, Bible commentators have found other examples of stories that feature themes similar to this example, and which, therefore, appear to have been structured as iterations of a pattern based on the seed of the serpent.[57]

Allusions to the seed motif in the New Testament

There are several examples from the New Testament that also seem [Page 23]to point back to the themes established in the curse of the serpent in Genesis 3. For example:

Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23:31–35)

This example refers to people as “serpents” and a “generation of vipers.” One of their primary characteristics is that they kill the prophets and wise men (who are the seed of the woman). Because of their actions, the blood of the righteous will come upon them (which is the application of the curse that came upon Cain).

Another example is found in Luke:

Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. (Luke 3:7–8)

In this instance we again have the seed of the serpent designated as a “generation of vipers.” They are encouraged to bring forth “fruits worthy of repentance,” in contrast to fruits that result in the tree being chopped down and cast into the fire (Luke 3:9). The seed of Abraham can be identified with the seed of the woman, and just as Cain was chided to follow the example of his brother Abel in performing an acceptable sacrifice to the Lord, this multitude is directed to follow the Law they had received, rather than trusting their relation to their distinguished ancestor to save them.

The many examples of framing the deeds of the wicked in terms of serpentine characteristics, together with other references to the stories of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel (trees, fruit, shedding blood on the [Page 24]earth) indicate that the above examples are abbreviated references to the seed motif. This pattern was first established in Genesis 3 in the story of the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. Matthew 23:35 makes the literary allusion quite clear.

Gaps in the Seed Motif that are Filled in by the Pearl of Great Price

The pattern of the seed of the serpent that is found in Genesis 3 contains some elements not found in Genesis 4 and vice versa. This is noteworthy because later iterations of this pattern seem to contain elements from both Genesis 3 and 4. This could suggest that a new version of the pattern emerged that is a composite of the original and the next iteration found in the story of Cain. However, it could also suggest that there are multiple versions of the stories, and that the ones in the modern Bible are missing elements that were originally present in older versions of the stories. The first element found in one story but not the other, and yet which is found in later occurrences (such as in the story of Abimelech) is conflict between relatives. Cain killed his brother just as Abimelech killed his brothers, but this element is absent from the story in Genesis 3. This raises the question of whether the conflict between relatives is an important part of the pattern, and if so, why is this detail missing from the story of the serpent in Genesis 3?

As we have seen, in the story of Abimelech he slays seventy of his own brothers, while adding the interesting comment to the men of Shechem that “remember also that I am your bone and your flesh” (Judges 9:2). This comment seems an odd thing to say to men who he is hoping to convince to aid him in killing his brothers. This unique phrase brings to mind the words of Adam concerning Eve: “This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). The difference in the purposes of those who utter these similar words highlights the contrast between the seed of the woman (who actually value familial relationships) and the seed of the serpent (who exploit relationships and betray them whenever the opportunity to gain from the betrayal presents itself, as illustrated by Abimelech).

As discussed earlier, Abimelech is far from the only seed of the serpent who behaves in this fashion. Other Old Testament examples of the seed of the serpent seeking to gain wealth or power by attempting to [Page 25]kill family members include Ishmael,[58] Esau,[59] the brothers of Joseph,[60] and Absalom.[61] The theme of homicidal tendencies toward relatives is also widened to include related tribes who fight against Israel in order to obtain power or wealth such as the Amalekites,[62] the Midianites,[63] the Edomites,[64] and the Moabites.[65] We may conclude, therefore, that seeking to kill a brother, a father, or a related people for gain is a hallmark of the seed of the serpent. Given that observation, the account of Cain and Abel found in Moses 5 includes an added and important detail that strengthens this argument. In the Pearl of Great Price version of the story, Cain does not kill Abel in a fit of passion, but his entire aim is premeditated murder for gain. He says: “Truly I am Mahan, the master of the great secret, that I may murder and get gain” (Moses 5:31). Bowen notes that this passage contains wordplay on the name Cain and its etiological meaning to “get gain,” an aspect of the story that reinforces the attribute of the seed of the serpent of killing for gain or power.[66]

If this is such an important part of the pattern, why is absent from the original version of the story in Genesis 3? The Latter-day Saint temple ceremony indicates that there is a version of the story recounted in Genesis 3 that includes wording suggesting a conflict between close relatives: When Satan comes to Eve to convince her to partake of the fruit, he introduces himself as her brother.

Rosenbaum interprets the events of Genesis 3:15 as also recounting a murder. He said: “the real fruit of that deception which took place in Eden was murder. By robbing Adam and Eve of immortality the snake and its descendants are the murderers of our ancestors and, by extension, of ourselves as well.” From the Latter-day Saint perspective, Rosenbaum’s statement might seem like hyperbole, but certainly the serpent caused what we would term the “spiritual death” of Adam and Eve, for after their transgression they were cast out from the presence of the Lord (Genesis 3:24). The first missing element of the story, [Page 26]that of conflict and murder between relatives, therefore, may not be absent at all.

Is this the case with other elements? Hamilton and others have strongly focused on the element of the story that involves the bruising of the serpent’s head,[67] yet the story of Cain in Genesis 4 lacks this element. It may be that Moses 5:28 addresses this shortcoming as well. This verse includes the detail that Cain involved some of his brethren in the secret plans of murder for gain: Satan commands him to “swear thy brethren by their heads that they tell it not; for if they tell it they shall surely die” (Moses 5:29). It also reveals that Lamech killed one of his brethren for the sake of this oath (Moses 5:49–50). These details give the impression that in order to spite God, Satan’s reaction to the curse on his own head was to deceive men into bringing that same curse upon their own heads. The additional details given by Moses 5 may therefore be interpreted as including the bruised-head element. The logic involved in making this connection combines the curse on the serpent with the short-term, gain-seeking attribute of the seed of the serpent. It can unfold as follows: The serpent is destined to have its head bruised, and while those who choose to follow the serpent may even be aware of this fact, they are willing to accept the curse in trade for the promise of short-term gain.

Like the bruised-head element, Hamilton and others identify a set of traits attributed to the serpent that are mentioned in connection with an antagonist. Some examples include cunning,[68] deceiving,[69]or lying in wait[70] for their enemies. It is the repeated use of these lead-words that creates the leitmotif. Cain, however, seems to have lacked this serpentine element, though as I have noted, the phrase “sin lieth at the door” can be seen as referring to Satan in his serpentine guise. However, in the version of the story in Moses 5, the Pearl of Great Price account shows both: 1) that Cain acted “in secret” (Moses 5:30) and 2) that those who participate in the secret combination initiated by Cain perform “their works in the dark” (Moses 5:51). I have only mentioned in passing the association of the seed of the serpent with wicked deeds performed in the dark, but that association is clear here. There are several examples in the Book of Mormon of wicked combinations acting clandestinely, in disguise, at night, and so forth. Briggs [Page 27]notes that the seed of the serpent has a particular penchant for acting in secrecy and by ambushing a victim:

The wounds inflicted by the serpent are in secret and in treachery, behind the back of man and beneath his heel. But the wounds inflicted by man upon the serpent are openly upon his head, crushing him to death.[71]

The story of Cain in Moses 5 is therefore true to this element of the pattern. This serpentine cunning and lying in wait is an element that I noted in the story of Abimelech and one that is present in many other occurrences of the pattern, such as in Absalom’s clever plot to betray and murder Amnon.[72]

Additionally, the seed of the serpent account in Moses leaves no ambiguity when it comes to the relationship between Satan and the seed of the serpent. Moses 7:37 states clearly about those who choose to follow Satan that “their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers; Satan shall be their father.” This seems to indicate that Satan is ultimately responsible for influencing them to commit sins, and the rest of the verse observes that all of them together will suffer misery because of their choices.

Some lead-words, which are found in some instances of the seed pattern, are not found in other instances. This suggests that the authors of scriptural stories made adaptations they felt warranted in specific circumstances to better convey aspects of the themes they were expounding. An example of a lead-word that is found only in some instances of the pattern is related to the concept of dominion. The lead-word command only appears in some of the occurrences of the seed motif. For example, commandment is used as a lead-word in the instance of the seed motif in 1 Samuel 15, but it is not used as a lead-word in the story of Abimelech. It also features strongly in some iterations of the seed leitmotif found in the Book of Mormon but not all. While the lead-word command or commandment appears nowhere in Genesis 4, in Moses 5 it is used ten times in a way that emphasizes the various concepts of dominion seen in the seed leitmotif. It is used when God first grants dominion to Adam (Moses 5:1), to illustrate Adam’s obedience in performing the proper sacrifice (v. 5–6), when Satan and God issue opposing commands (v. 13–14), and when Cain is presented with the option of choosing whom he will follow (v. 18, 23). [Page 28]He elects to obey Satan’s commands (v.30), thus becoming the seed of the serpent. In other words, the use of the command lead-word is sometimes, although not always, used as a way of strengthening the linkage to the seed motif.

One of the challenges of using the lead-word method lies in determining if a common word such as “command” is intended as a lead-word, or if it is merely repeated by chance in a given passage of scripture. Yonatan Grossman notes that:

The definition of this phenomenon relies on a certain circularity—the reader first discovers this special significance of the repetition of the word in the narrative, and only then can he define the special repetition as the use of a [lead-word]. In this sense, the meaning that the reader grants to a literary phenomenon precedes the characterization of the phenomenon in the text. The beginning of the process lies, practically, in the decision of the reader about its significance. At its end, the characterization of the vessel expresses the meaning of the leitwort.[73]

My interpretation of the process is that a reader identifies a possible lead-word based on its salience in a text, attempts to identify a possible intertextual linkage based on how well the lead-word fits within a given motif, and if the word provides greater light and knowledge of the motif being explored. Only then is one justified in calling it a “lead-word.” As Jeff Lindsay suggested in a personal communication, we may say that a lead-word has been identified when there is a sufficient critical mass of lead words and related themes to make that connection seem likely.[74]

The unique and revelatory content of Moses 5 not only solves gaps in the leitmotif of the seed, but it also adds other essential information. For example, Hendel, lacking Restoration scripture, complains of other gaps in the Genesis 4 story. He worries about the lack of a wife for Cain to marry and fails to understand Cain’s fear that other men might kill him because of his murder if there were no other men [Page 29]to kill him.[75] These problems are based on the assumption that Cain and Abel are the only other humans at that point besides Adam and Eve. Both of those perceived gaps are solved definitively by Moses 5:12 “And Adam and Eve blessed the name of God, and they made all things known unto their sons and their daughters.” Assuming a linear timeline from the start of the chapter to the end, this indicates that Cain and Abel were among many children of Adam and Eve; they were not the only children.

In their article examining intertextual linkages between the book of Moses and the Book of Mormon, Jeff Lindsay and Noel Reynolds indicate that “an ancient text with some similarities to our modern Book of Moses may have been on the brass plates, and that the brass plates version of Genesis (or something similar to the Book of Moses) may have extensively influenced the Book of Mormon.”[76]

The findings I have been discussing based on the seed leitmotif add more pieces of evidence to those Lindsay and Reynolds assembled. Additionally, their article contains information with a direct bearing on our current thesis. For example, they make particular note of Moses 7:37 (“But behold, their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers; Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom”). They observe that “This passage strongly implies that both mortals and Satan suffer misery for their rebellion” and that this passage of scripture “is a perfect antiparallel to the gospel message for those who follow Jesus Christ.”[77] This observation perfectly captures the major theme encapsulated in the leitmotif of the seed of the serpent versus the seed of the woman illustrated in the book of Moses. Additional insights pointed out by Lindsay and Reynolds that correlate with themes present in the seed motif include Satan’s dominion over the hearts of men, cursing answered upon the heads of the parents, and Satan leading men into captivity (discussed in greater detail below).[78]

The applicability of their insights into the themes treated in both [Page 30]the book of Moses and the Book of Mormon to the seed motif can be seen in their treatment of the theme of dominion. Lindsay and Reynolds point to Moses 6:15 as a possible source for three important Book of Mormon concepts: satanic “‘secret works’ (related to ‘secret combination[s]’ in Moses 5:51), ‘seeking for power,’ and ‘wars and bloodshed.’”[79] All three of these concepts are themes with a close association to the seed motif, and what is more, their insight into the link between Satan’s dominion over men and his stirring them up to anger is a unique aspect of the iterations of the seed of the serpent that is frequently and specifically mentioned in the actions of those who reject Christ. Examples in the Book of Mormon are discussed below, but I will note here that anger is mentioned as an attribute of the seed of the serpent in the cases of Laban; Laman and Lemuel; Noah and his priests; the Amlicites; and Zerahemnah, to name a few (1 Nephi 3:13, 7:19, 16:18, 18:10; Mosiah 13:4, 8; Alma 2:8; and Alma 44:2, 12, 16).

Returning to the book of Moses, one more theme addressed that is identified as a part of the seed motif but absent from Genesis 3 and 4, is that of captivity or bondage. Ronner attempts to bridge this gap using Genesis 4:7. He says, “Cain was warned with enslavement to sin as a consequence of failing to turn to do good,”[80] but this view seems a bit of a stretch, given the actual wording of Genesis 4:7. However, as with the other concepts of the seed motif that are missing in Genesis, Moses fills in the gap. Moses 4:4 explains that Satan’s purpose is to “deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will.” Lindsay and Reynolds treat in detail the linked concepts of deception, captivity, and dominion as a compound parallel found in both the book of Moses and the Book of Mormon, which again suggests that the implementation of the seed leitmotif in the Book of Mormon stems from unique wording present on the brass plates.

There are significant differences between the versions of the seed leitmotif found in Genesis compared to those in Moses. A much more ancient version of the current version of Genesis was available to the Nephites. This version was written on the brass plates and would presumably be much more faithful to the original words of the Hebrew prophets than the modern Bible and could be similar to the inspired translation of the writings of Moses found in the Pearl of Great Price. Reynolds notes that “There is strong evidence that the version of Genesis contained in the Brass Plates was the same or similar to the [Page 31]Book of Moses as given to Joseph Smith.”[81] The seed leitmotif provides evidence consistent with the thesis about the similarity of the book of Moses and the brass plates. The presence of the expected themes and lead-words in the account in Moses suggests that a fuller account endured uniquely in the brass plates, whereas parts of the narrative have been diminished or deleted from the Biblical account. This finding supports recent studies of the connection between the brass plates and the book of Moses.[82]

The Seed Motif in the Book of Mormon

We have seen that the seed of the serpent motif is found embedded in many different stories within the standard works. This way of framing the conflict between good and evil seems to have been very compelling for the ancient Hebrews. There is an obvious shared cultural heritage between the authors of the Old Testament (and the brass plates) and the authors of the Book of Mormon. This should lead us to expect that we would also encounter stories about the conflict between good and evil narrated within its pages and framed in the same terms. And that is exactly what we do find. By using the same tools employed above we can see that the Book of Mormon does, indeed, make use of this same seed of the serpent and seed of the woman leitmotif. Let’s consider several examples of this below.

The Amlicites as seed of the serpent

In Alma, when a civil war brings one portion of the Nephite polity into conflict with the other, the Book of Mormon author narrating the story employs the seed leitmotif as a way of framing the conflict. This is done by employing the common set of themes of the seed of the serpent. These include the serpentine characteristics, the betrayal and attempted murder of closely related people, the rejection of the word of God in favor of the pursuit of worldly wealth and power, and the prominent feature of a curse.

As the stage is set for the Amlicite civil war, Alma notes that Amlici [Page 32]“had, by his cunning, drawn away much people after him” (Alma 2:2). Cunning is one of the serpentine traits; it is also a lead-word.[83] “It was his intent to destroy the church of God” (v. 3), a goal that Amlici shares with others who are portrayed as seed of the serpent. Seeking to destroy the righteous followers of Christ, either individually or collectively as “the church,” is an attribute of the seed of the serpent that occurs in other examples in the Book of Mormon.

Alma explains that “when Amlici was made king” over the ones who joined him, “he commanded them that they should take up arms against their brethren; and this he did that he might subject them to him” (v. 10). The idea of commanding is another lead-word discussed earlier, and it is occurring again, here. I have noted that the seed of the serpent seeks to obtain dominion over close kin through murder—another seed motif phrase. There are other elements involved in the Amlicite war that may not present an entirely convincing association with the seed motif individually, but taken as a whole, strengthen the allusion to Genesis 3 and 4. These include:

- The explicit mention that the Lamanites were naked, being covered only by skins (Alma 3:5). This is an element I have not yet touched on in our discussion but one that features prominently in the story of Adam and Eve (see Moses 4:17, 27). “Naked” in scripture usually means “without the covering of God,” an apt description for the Lamanites at this time.

- The statement that both the Lamanites and the Amlicites had come out in open rebellion: the Lamanites against “their holy brethren” (Alma 3:6), a designation that suggests the seed of the woman, and the Amlicites against God (Alma 3:18).

- The refusal to repent when offered a chance (Alma 3:14).

- Driving out the Lamanites (Alma 3:23) and the Amlicites (Alma 2:37), a possible allusion to the exile theme I mentioned briefly beginning with Adam and Eve being driven out of the garden (Moses 4:31).

- The conscious choice to listen to an evil spirit (Alma 3:26).

After the resolution of the conflict, the discussion that assigns meaning to the battles makes extensive use of multiple lead-words, and in so doing seems designed to tie this instance of the leitmotif to 2 Nephi 5 and Genesis 4 where a curse placed on the seed of the [Page 33]Lamanites and the mark and curse placed on Cain are discussed. The mark placed on Cain is not given much emphasis in Genesis 4 and is not used as a lead-word there. However, it is clearly emphasized in Alma 3, and these three chapters (Genesis 4, 2 Nephi 5, and Alma 3) seem to be the only chapters in the scriptures that deal with these interlinked themes of marks and curses. In the few verses selected to illustrate the lead-words below, it is clear that the words curse, seed, and mark are prominent in the discussion. In Alma 3 there are 8 instances of the word curse, 11 instances of seed, and 11 instances of the word mark.

Now we will return again to the Amlicites, for they also had a mark set upon them; yea, they set the mark upon themselves, yea, even a mark of red upon their foreheads. Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed, from this time henceforth and forever, except they repent of their wickedness and turn to me that I may have mercy upon them. And again: I will set a mark upon him that mingleth his seed with thy brethren, that they may be cursed also. And again: I will set a mark upon him that fighteth against thee and thy seed. And again, I say he that departeth from thee shall no more be called thy seed; and I will bless thee, and whomsoever shall be called thy seed, henceforth and forever; and these were the promises of the Lord unto Nephi and to his seed. Now the Amlicites knew not that they were fulfilling the words of God when they began to mark themselves in their foreheads; nevertheless they had come out in open rebellion against God; therefore it was expedient that the curse should fall upon them. Now I would that ye should see that they brought upon themselves the curse; and even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation.[84] (Alma 3:13–19)

The lead words curse and mark used here in the case of the Amlicites, together with the doctrinal commentary about the nature of curses, how they are incurred, and especially the exercise of free will [Page 34]in rejecting God’s word, all provide substantial context to understand the stories of the curse of Cain and the curse of Laman and Lemuel in much greater depth. The use of lead-words suggests that the linkage to these other stories is intentional and that the purpose is greater understanding about the interplay between divine disapprobation and human free will in the operation of the curse. In the narrative, the link to the curse that came upon the Lamanites is made explicitly (Alma 3:6). It is important to note that the mark, as well as the curse that is associated with the mark in these stories, is not a genetic or racial trait. The Book of Mormon makes it very clear that the mark of the Amlicites and the mark of the Lamanites came as a result of their choices.[85]

In this instance of the seed motif there is no mention of any heads getting crushed or bruised, although the foreheads of the Amlicites feature prominently in association with the curse, similar to how Moses 5 associates the heads of the seed of the serpent with the curse without ever mentioning bruised heads. This difference may indicate a dependence on unique wording on the brass plates.

A closer look at the unique marking of the Amlicites in light of concepts in the book of Moses is warranted. Recall that Lindsay and Reynolds made particular note of Moses 7:37 in their discussion of dominion mentioned above. In that passage of scripture, the words “their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers” features prominently immediately before the phrase “Satan shall be their father.” Lindsay and Reynolds note that “This passage strongly implies that both mortals and Satan suffer misery for their rebellion.”[86] This is a concept that is found in the commentary in Alma 3. In their discussion of a linked concept (that of sins and curses answered upon the heads of the parents), Lindsay and Reynolds also observe that the Book of [Page 35]Mormon contains several instances of “blood coming upon the heads of the wicked.”[87] Both of these concepts seem to have found literal and metaphorical fulfillment in the story of the Amlicites, who put a “mark of red upon their foreheads” (Alma 3:13) after having “come out in open rebellion against God” (Alma 3:18) so that those of their number who were slain were sent to “reap eternal misery, according to the spirit which they listed to obey” (Alma 3:26).

A probable instance of the seed of the serpent that I will not explore in this article also includes a description of a unique, self-inflicted mark, similar to that of the Amlicites. The Gadianton robbers who came up to battle against the united peoples of the Lamanites and Nephites were “dyed in blood, and their heads were shorn” (3 Nephi 4:7). This shaving of their heads and dying of their skin is an instance in which heads are marked in a way that mimics the bruising promised to the seed of the serpent.

The word seed, which is clearly used as a lead-word in Alma 3, also requires closer examination. Lead-words are termed such because they are meant to lead the reader somewhere, and although the fact that I have referred to the pattern under discussion as the “seed motif” might indicate that seed is an important part of the concept, most instances of the pattern do not emphasize the word seed. In fact, it is only touched upon lightly in Moses and Genesis. Therefore, it may make sense to look for a solution elsewhere to see the great emphasis given to the word in Alma 3. The chapters of 1 Nephi 13–15 use the word seed extensively, but the usage is future-oriented and does not appear to have any connection to the seed motif. The most likely solution is that this lead-word is meant to lead to Alma 46, where captain Moroni’s stirring speech as he hoists the title of liberty makes use of the seed leitmotif. I will not go into a detailed study here; a brief examination of Moroni’s usage of common themes from the seed motif and a sample of his employment of the seed lead-word will suffice:

Now this was the covenant which they made, and they cast their garments at the feet of Moroni, saying: We covenant with our God, that we shall be destroyed, even as our brethren in the land northward, if we shall fall into transgression; yea, he may cast us at the feet of our enemies, even as we have cast our garments at thy feet to be trodden under foot, if we shall fall into transgression. Moroni said unto them: [Page 36]Behold, we are a remnant of the seed of Jacob; yea, we are a remnant of the seed of Joseph, whose coat was rent by his brethren into many pieces; yea, and now behold, let us remember to keep the commandments of God, or our garments shall be rent by our brethren, and we be cast into prison, or be sold, or be slain. Yea, let us preserve our liberty as a remnant of Joseph; yea, let us remember the words of Jacob, before his death, for behold, he saw that a part of the remnant of the coat of Joseph was preserved and had not decayed. And he said—Even as this remnant of garment of my son hath been preserved, so shall a remnant of the seed of my son be preserved by the hand of God, and be taken unto himself, while the remainder of the seed of Joseph shall perish, even as the remnant of his garment. (Alma 46:22–24)

The themes from the seed motif Moroni mentions in this passage of scripture include being trodden underfoot, being sold (into bondage), and being rent (a synonym for killed in this usage) by their brethren. The context of the battle in which Amalickiah—who was “a man of cunning device and a man of many flattering words” (Alma 46:10)—causes a civil war as he seeks to proclaim himself king matches the pattern of the Amlicite rebellion quite closely. It makes sense, therefore, that Mormon would create an intertextual linkage between these stories using the seed motif.

As a final note for this instance of the leitmotif, an interesting individual mentioned as part of this story is Zeram, a spy who is sent to watch the fleeing Amlicites (Alma 2:22). His name may mean “their seed,” meaning the “chosen people,”[88] which is interesting in light of the extensive discussion involving curses, seed, and marks.

Zerahemnah as seed of the serpent

Another individual whose name may have something to do with seeds is Zerahemnah. Zerahemnah may mean “seed of the chosen one,”[89] which may be meant ironically since it would seem to identify Zerahemnah as seed of the woman, when in fact he is clearly identified as seed of the serpent in the narrative. Zerahemnah is identified as seed of the serpent based on his desires for dominion (including [Page 37]subjecting the Nephites to bondage), which he attempts to achieve through the shedding of blood. In the case of Genesis 3 and 4 we saw that Hendel identified desire, rule, and curse as lead-words, and that he further associated the spilling of a brother’s blood on the ground and the concept of the right to rule with the stories recounted in those chapters. Here we see Moroni use similar lead-words and concepts in his characterization of Zerahemnah. Moroni points out the fact that he and his army have no desire either to shed blood or submit anyone to bondage, yet these are precisely the reason for Zerahemnah’s attack:

Behold, Zerahemnah, that we do not desire to be men of blood. Ye know that ye are in our hands, yet we do not desire to slay you. Behold, we have not come out to battle against you that we might shed your blood for power; neither do we desire to bring any one to the yoke of bondage. But this is the very cause for which ye have come against us. (Alma 44:1–2)

As we have seen, the seed motif includes the theme of a contest over the rightful exercise of dominion. That Moroni’s mention of bondage is not merely an idle remark is made clear when Moroni then challenges Zerahemnah saying “we will see who shall have power over this people; yea, we will see who shall be brought into bondage,” (Alma 44:7). Moroni’s words, then, indicate that this battle is being fought over the question of who has the right to command the people, and he clearly explains that the right of command is granted based on fidelity to the word of God—command being another lead-word discussed earlier:

And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you, by our faith, by our religion, and by our rites of worship, and by our church, and by the sacred support which we owe to our wives and our children, by that liberty which binds us to our lands and our country; yea, and also by the maintenance of the sacred word of God, to which we owe all our happiness; and by all that is most dear unto us—Yea, and this is not all; I command you by all the desires which ye have for life, that ye deliver up your weapons of war unto us, and we will seek not your blood, but we will spare your lives, if ye will go your way and come not again to war against us. And now, if ye do not this, [Page 38]behold, ye are in our hands, and I will command my men that they shall fall upon you, and inflict the wounds of death in your bodies, that ye may become extinct; and then we will see who shall have power over this people; yea, we will see who shall be brought into bondage. (Alma 44:5–7)

While Zerahemnah and his men came to battle because of their desires to subjugate the Nephites, and to assert their right of command over them, they instead find themselves in the reversed position where Moroni is the one making commands because of the power he has received from God. He demands that the Lamanites surrender their weapons based on their desire for life. The lead-word command is not the same lead-word associated with the concept of dominion that Hendel identified in Genesis 3 and 4. (Hendel identified rule as the lead-word there.) However, Moroni’s use of the command lead-word makes sense if, as I have asserted, the Nephites depended on a version of the story that corresponds closely with the book of Moses. As noted above, command is used ten times in Moses 5 in a way that strongly emphasizes the various concepts of dominion seen in the seed leitmotif. The use of the command lead-word in this instance is an excellent way of strengthening the linkage to the seed leitmotif.

Zerahemnah rejects Moroni’s explanations and proposes an alternative naturalistic explanation for falling into the hands of the Nephites due to their cunning (Alma 44:9), perhaps slyly suggesting that Moroni, not Zerahemnah, is the seed of the serpent. Zerahemnah then seeks Moroni’s life and is struck a powerful blow to the head (v.12). Once again, this is in accordance with the pattern from Genesis 3 about bruising or crushing the head.

That Zerahemnah fits into the seed of the serpent motif is confirmed by his seeking for power and dominion by instigating murderous war between closely related peoples, rejecting the word of God and the opportunity offered by Moroni to repent and withdraw, attempting to kill Moroni, and the blow to his head. Other possible allusions that strengthen the likelihood of an intentional intertextual link include:

- The explicit reference to the exposed nakedness of the Lamanites (Alma 43:37) similar to what was stated in the case of the Amlicites.

- Similar to Amlici, Zerahemnah seeks to destroy the people of God. This is noted twice in the build-up to the attack by Zerahemnah: Alma 43:10 explains that the Nephites knew [Page 39]that any true worshipper of God “the Lamanites would destroy,” and the people of Ammon also knew “if they should fall into the hands of the Lamanites they would be destroyed” (v.11).

- The mention that the intention of the Lamanites was “to destroy their brethren” and to “bring them into bondage” so that they could “establish a kingdom” for themselves, thereby hitting upon three themes linked with the seed of the serpent in a single verse (v.29).

- The reference to spilling blood upon the ground (explored in greater detail below).

As noted above, Hendel commented on the curse that Cain incurred because of spilling Abel’s blood on the earth. An interesting intertextual linkage in Alma 44 unites the concepts of dominion, the right to rule, and the power to command in the leitmotif of the seed of the serpent with an intertextual linkage to Genesis 4 in the context of relatives spilling blood on the ground. In this case, Moroni uses a phrase that points to the story of Cain as he says:

Now I cannot recall the words which I have spoken, therefore as the Lord liveth, ye shall not depart except ye depart with an oath that ye will not return again against us to war. Now as ye are in our hands we will spill your blood upon the ground, or ye shall submit to the conditions which I have proposed. (Alma 44:11)

The phrase “spill your blood upon the ground,” when considered in the context of the framework of the seed of the serpent motif that has been invoked in this narrative, again appears to echo the story of Cain. As mentioned previously, Cain was “cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand” (Genesis 4:11).

The terrible nature of Moroni’s oath and the reason that he has exposed himself and his people to greater danger by trying to convince the Lamanites to withdraw in peace is exposed by this intertextual linkage: Moroni is doing everything within his power to avoid the sin of Cain, which involved spilling the blood of his brother upon the ground. Moroni does this by metaphorically confronting the seed of the serpent in the very act and commanding them in the name of God to stop (Alma 44:5) and repent of their evil intent. This echoes God’s warning to Cain of the consequences if he would not repent. [Page 40]Zerahemnah behaves as Cain did, for despite warnings to both men, they persisted in their wickedness and incurred the prophesied outcome (Genesis 4:11; Alma 44:18–19). In the case of Zerahemnah, his choice exposes his people to having their heads crushed, as is the inevitable fate of the seed of the serpent. As Alma puts it,

But behold, their naked skins and their bare heads were exposed to the sharp swords of the Nephites; yea, behold they were pierced and smitten, yea, and did fall exceedingly fast before the swords of the Nephites; and they began to be swept down, even as the soldier of Moroni had prophesied. (Alma 44:18)

The seed motif in the story of Nephi and Laban

From the very beginning of his account, Nephi frames his own actions in terms that indicate that he is the seed of the woman. He hears and obeys the word of the Lord, and he refuses to turn back when things do not go as expected. For example, when Lehi tells Nephi about the Lord’s commandment to return to Jerusalem to get the brass plates (1 Nephi 3:2), Nephi utilizes a lead-word to highlight his response:

I said unto my father: I will go and do the things which the Lord hath commanded, for I know that the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them. (1 Nephi 3:7)

Nephi’s commitment is reiterated after the first attempt to get the plates results in failure and his brothers are ready to give up. His response mirrors the language of his earlier commitment: Nephi “said unto them that: As the Lord liveth, and as we live, we will not go down unto our father in the wilderness until we have accomplished the thing which the Lord hath commanded us. Wherefore, let us be faithful in keeping the commandments of the Lord” (1 Nephi 3:15–16).

Nephi comes up with a plan that involves purchasing the plates, and as he and his brothers make this proposal to Laban, Nephi explains “when Laban saw our property, and that it was exceedingly great, he did lust after it, insomuch that he thrust us out, and sent his servants to slay us, that he might obtain our property” (1 Nephi 3:25). As we have seen, the seed of the serpent seek to kill the seed of the woman in pursuit of wealth and/or dominion, and it is at this point that Nephi begins to frame Laban as one of the seed of the serpent.

[Page 41]After it becomes clear that Nephi alone is the one to solve the conflict with Laban, Nephi burnishes his credentials as the seed of the woman by first explaining to his brothers that righteous people engaged in fulfilling the commandments of God are sure to succeed, no matter what powers are arrayed against them. He provides an illustrative example by comparing the Egyptians and the Hebrews in the story of Moses. His goal appears to be to show that the confrontation with Laban is of a similar civilization-changing magnitude as the very foundation story of Israel, that of Moses and Pharaoh (which is itself also framed in terms of the seed of the serpent motif).[90] He points out the potency of the word of God in the mouth of the servants of God by noting that Moses “truly spake unto the waters of the Red Sea and they divided hither and thither” (1 Nephi 4:2). He then explains that the outcome of the conflict between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent is already defined: “the Lord is able to deliver us, even as our fathers, and to destroy Laban, even as the Egyptians” (v. 3).

With these foundational stories of Israel in mind, Nephi leverages yet one more foundational story as he takes up his narrative in a way that is clearly meant to bring to mind the story of David and Goliath. Larsen explains:

Deeply acquainted as they would have been with the story of David and Goliath, Nephi’s people surely saw the parallel between young David and young Nephi. (Nephi has carefully composed his narrative in such a way that they would see it because of multiple structural and sequential similarities, notwithstanding the very different contexts and mix of characters that clearly differentiate the two stories.) Having recognized the allusion, Nephi’s people would have understood that, in constraining Nephi to slay Laban as he did, the Lord marked Nephi as a legitimate successor to David in their new branch of Israel.[91]

When Nephi finds Laban drunk and passed out on the ground in his narrative, he first deftly emphasizes that Laban is the seed of the serpent by calling to mind the well-known behaviors associated with the seed of the serpent. He reasons that “I also knew that he had sought to [Page 42]take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord; and he also had taken away our property.” Like Cain, Laban was willing to attempt to kill Nephi and his brothers for the sake of getting gain. Nephi warns about what is at stake by emphasizing the necessity of the scriptures in coming to know the commandments of the Lord and by once again using the word commandment as a lead-word, recalling the promise that: “Inasmuch as thy seed shall keep my commandments, they shall prosper in the land of promise. Yea, and I also thought that they could not keep the commandments of the Lord according to the law of Moses, save they should have the law. . . . And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands for this cause—that I might obtain the records according to his commandments” (1 Nephi 4:11–17). As we have seen, the lead-word command or commandments is used prominently in Moses 5, and the lead-word used here is likely meant to point to the story of Cain contained therein. Nephi confirms both his own identity as seed of the woman and Laban’s identity as seed of the serpent as he “took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword” (1 Nephi 4:18–19). The structural parallel links this to 1 Samuel 17 where David, once he had defeated Goliath “stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew him, and cut off his head therewith” (v. 51). As has been mentioned several times, striking the head of an enemy of Israel is a recurring theme that may indicate the seed of the serpent motif.[92] Ben McGuire has the following to say of the parallels between Nephi’s killing of Laban and the story of David and Goliath:

A few of the main thematic parallels between the two accounts are that both unbelieving Israel and Laman and Lemuel are fearful of the main antagonist, both David and Nephi prophesy the death of their opponent, and both Goliath and Laban have their heads cut off and armor stripped. The implications of this allusion run deep. At a time in which the right to kingship was continually in dispute between Nephi and Laman, Nephi casting himself as David—the archetypal king of Judah, whose faith led to his supplanting Saul—could be seen as legitimizing his regal authority over Laman.[93]

[Page 43]Nephi framed his slaying of Laban in terms of the story of the seed leitmotif based on verbal, thematic, and structural parallels. He uses literary allusions to point to the story of David and Goliath, a famous instance of the rivalry between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent.[94]

Abinadi’s depiction of Christ as the seed of the woman

Perhaps the most important instance of the leitmotif of the seed of the serpent in the Book of Mormon is found in the story of Abinadi. What is interesting about this instance is the way in which Abinadi so deftly weaves the leitmotif into both his own preaching and his quotations of Isaiah as he expounds the doctrine of salvation through the intermediation of the Messiah. The theme of his discourse in these chapters is: “even all the prophets who have prophesied ever since the world began—have they not spoken more or less concerning these things?” (Mosiah 13:33). As he explores this theme, he quotes Isaiah in a famous passage:

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities. . . . Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. (Mosiah 14:5, 10)

As he explains the meaning of this and other passages from Isaiah, Abinadi focuses specifically on the seed of the woman, who is associated with the Messiah. In the above quote from Isaiah, the bruising that the suffering servant receives calls to mind the ability of the serpent to bruise the heel of the seed of the woman. Abinadi immediately makes clear to whom he is referring when he mentions the seed of the suffering servant:

And who shall be his seed? Behold I say unto you, that whosoever has heard the words of the prophets, yea, all the holy prophets who have prophesied concerning the coming of the Lord—I say unto you, that all those who have hearkened unto their words, and believed that the Lord would redeem his people, and have looked forward to that day for [Page 44]a remission of their sins, I say unto you, that these are his seed, or they are the heirs of the kingdom of God. For these are they whose sins he has borne; these are they for whom he has died, to redeem them from their transgressions. And now, are they not his seed? (Mosiah 15:10–12)

Abinadi is the Book of Mormon prophet who most clearly articulates the attributes of the seed of the woman. The seed of the woman are the followers of Christ who:

- Hear and hearken to the words of the prophets.

- Believe that the Lord will redeem his people.

- Look forward to a remission of their sins.

- Those who publish peace and salvation.

The word seed is prominent enough in this passage that it may be meant as a lead-word. If so, it may be linking this instance of the seed leitmotif to both the story of Zerahemnah and the story of the title of liberty, both of which also use seed as a lead-word. After discussing the attributes of the Savior in more detail, Abinadi quite explicitly ties his discourse back to the seed of the serpent leitmotif in Genesis chapter 3. He says:

And then shall the wicked be cast out, and they shall have cause to howl, and weep, and wail, and gnash their teeth; and this because they would not hearken unto the voice of the Lord; therefore the Lord redeemeth them not. For they are carnal and devilish, and the devil has power over them; yea, even that old serpent that did beguile our first parents, which was the cause of their fall; which was the cause of all mankind becoming carnal, sensual, devilish, knowing evil from good, subjecting themselves to the devil. Thus all mankind were lost; and behold, they would have been endlessly lost were it not that God redeemed his people from their lost and fallen state. (Mosiah 16:2–4)

The attributes of the seed motif in the foregoing quote include:

- The exile theme (being cast out).

- Refusing to hearken to the voice of the Lord.

- A contest over the question of dominion.

- Choosing the devil (the serpent) to rule over them.

In addition to these, Abinadi appears to use the command lead-word in Mosiah 13, in accordance with the established pattern.

[Page 45]Abinadi wraps up his teaching with a call for Noah and his priests to repent in terms that encapsulate the core of the issue of dominion in the seed motif (that of choosing Satan and granting him dominion). King Noah and company are quite clearly behaving in seed of the serpent fashion by rebelling against the commandments of God, surrendering to their carnal desires, ignoring the warnings of the consequences of their behavior, refusing to repent, and thus allowing Satan to have all power over them. Abinadi’s warning echoes God’s warning to Cain as he says:

But remember that he that persists in his own carnal nature, and goes on in the ways of sin and rebellion against God, remaineth in his fallen state and the devil hath all power over him. Therefore he is as though there was no redemption made, being an enemy to God . . . having gone according to their own carnal wills and desires; having never called upon the Lord while the arms of mercy were extended towards them; for the arms of mercy were extended towards them, and they would not; they being warned of their iniquities and yet they would not depart from them; and they were commanded to repent and yet they would not repent. And now, ought ye not to tremble and repent of your sins, and remember that only in and through Christ ye can be saved? (Mosiah 16:5, 12–13)

Of course, Abinadi himself is one of the holy prophets he mentioned in connection with the seed of the Messiah, and so it is also not surprising when Noah and his priests put him to death, as is the usual approach for the seed of the serpent when confronted by the seed of the woman. With the usual near-sightedness of the seed of the serpent, King Noah and his priests ignore Abinadi’s warnings that how they treat him after he has delivered his message will be a type of things to come. They seem to think that once Abinadi is safely silenced, the threat to their dominion will have ended. However, as we saw in the case of Abimelech, the seed of the serpent often encounters poetic justice in the manner of their demise. King Noah suffers death by fire, just as he caused Abinadi to suffer death by fire (Mosiah 19:20). The priests of Noah proceed to assert their dominion over Alma_1 and the converted followers of Christ (the seed of the woman) by enslaving them (Mosiah 23:23), and later on they cause the converted followers [Page 46]of Christ among the Lamanites to suffer death by fire (Alma 25:5), before they themselves are burned in like fashion (Alma 25:8).

Other possible instances of the seed motif in the Book of Mormon

There are several other possible instances of stories in the Book of Mormon that are framed in the context of the seed of the serpent versus the seed of the woman. I will not examine any of these stories here but will only mention that the narratives dealing with Nephi_1 confronting his brothers when they propose returning to Jerusalem, the Great and Abominable Church, Nephi_1 and the construction of the ship, the story of Korihor, the preaching of Samuel the Lamanite, Nephi_2 and the sealing power, and the story of Jared and Akish all contain elements that might hint at a framing within the context of the seed of the serpent.

The Seed of the Serpent in Modern-day Scripture

The Doctrine and Covenants does not possess any instances of the seed motif. This is not surprising, as the motif is based on an ancient Hebrew way of viewing the battle between the forces of good and evil. However, there is one unique passage found in Doctrine and Covenants 10:20–28 in which the Lord describes Satan and his minions as possessing the characteristics of the seed of the serpent. These attributes include an association with darkness rather than light,[95] a cunning plan, attempting to destroy the works of God, deceiving and lying in wait, an intent to destroy the souls of men, stirring men up to anger, lying, flattering, and even the poetic justice we have seen elsewhere wherein they will “catch themselves in their own snare.”

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that Satan has great hold upon their hearts; he stirreth them up to iniquity against that which is good; And their hearts are corrupt, and full of wickedness and abominations; and they love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil; therefore they will not ask of me. Satan stirreth them up, that he may lead their souls to destruction. And thus he has laid a cunning plan, thinking to destroy the work of God; but I will require this at their hands, and it shall turn to their shame and condemnation in the day of judgment. Yea, he stirreth up their hearts to anger against [Page 47]this work. Yea, he saith unto them: Deceive and lie in wait to catch, that ye may destroy; behold, this is no harm. And thus he flattereth them, and telleth them that it is no sin to lie that they may catch a man in a lie, that they may destroy him. And thus he flattereth them, and leadeth them along until he draggeth their souls down to hell; and thus he causeth them to catch themselves in their own snare. And thus he goeth up and down, to and fro in the earth, seeking to destroy the souls of men. Verily, verily, I say unto you, wo be unto him that lieth to deceive because he supposeth that another lieth to deceive, for such are not exempt from the justice of God. (Doctrine and Covenants 10:20–28)

In addition to this reference from modern-day scripture, there is the matter of the temple endowment ceremony where the happenings narrated in Genesis 3 are at the core. I will not go into detail here, but suffice it to say that the seed motif is at the heart of Latter-day Saint theology, based on the presentation of the Genesis story in the endowment.

Conclusions—Why Should We Care about the Seed of the Serpent?

It is interesting that the Book of Mormon authors picked up on a biblical theme and incorporated it into their own writings. But why should modern readers care? A reason that familiarity with this pattern is meaningful is because it reveals something about how the Lord operates. If, as I have argued, the lead-words and leitmotif are rhetorical strategies the Nephites consistently used, the reason we should care about them is that we will better understand their intended meanings when we understand the rhetorical strategies they used.

Several of the cases where the seed of the serpent leitmotif is used in the Book of Mormon are situations where a high degree of moral hazard is involved. Life or death decisions are made, and the outcome affects groups ranging from a handful of people to hundreds of thousands. Not only are the stakes high about who is in the right and who is in the wrong but they frequently involve closely related individuals or closely related peoples. The authors of the Book of Mormon seem to have found it necessary to label the antagonists more clearly in cases where the reader would naturally be led to question the decisions those antagonists made. Nephi’s decision to kill Laban is certainly one [Page 48]such case. Other cases include the brutal civil war that erupted in the Amlicite rebellion and the execution of Abinadi. The Book of Mormon authors seem to frequently employ the seed leitmotif to clarify what is at stake when difficult and potentially controversial decisions are under consideration.

Of profound importance to our spiritual survival is the concept at the heart of the seed leitmotif—that of choosing to either exercise our God-given dominion and let God prevail or else to allow Satan to rule over us. The seed motif in the Book of Mormon emphasizes that anyone can choose to become either the seed of the serpent or the seed of the woman, i.e., followers of Jesus Christ. They can “reap their rewards according to their works, whether they were good or whether they were bad, to reap eternal happiness or eternal misery, according to the spirit which they listed to obey, whether it be a good spirit or a bad one” (Alma 3:26). In this view of things, the chosen people are chosen not because the Lord is biased but because the people seek out and follow the Lord. Nephi makes this argument again and again in the context of the seed of the serpent leitmotif, and so does Mormon. Some examples include:

And now, do ye suppose that the children of this land, who were in the land of promise, who were driven out by our fathers, do ye suppose that they were righteous? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. Do ye suppose that our fathers would have been more choice than they if they had been righteous? I say unto you, Nay. Behold, the Lord esteemeth all flesh in one; he that is righteous is favored of God. (1 Nephi 17:33–35)

Now the Amlicites knew not that they were fulfilling the words of God when they began to mark themselves in their foreheads; nevertheless they had come out in open rebellion against God; therefore it was expedient that the curse should fall upon them. Now I would that ye should see that they brought upon themselves the curse; and even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation. (Alma 3:18–19)

The Book of Mormon leverages the seed motif to help build faith in God through the recognition that he guides and protects those who choose to follow him, and he curses those who come out in rebellion against him. As Nephi puts it in one of his many examples of contrasting [Page 49]the outcomes for the righteous with those of the wicked: “And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the law of Moses. And the Lord was with us; and we did prosper exceedingly” (2 Nephi 5:10–11) versus “And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint” (2 Nephi 5:20).

The point is repeated so many times that it is difficult to miss. By recognizing the lead-words that identify the pattern that bridges all of the standard works, we can see that the Lord operates across the broad sweep of human history. The pattern yields insights into the nature of prophecy and how the people of the Lord react to prophecy. Understanding the pattern is of great importance in our day. As President Nelson has said:

In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting and constant influence of the Holy Ghost. My beloved brothers and sisters, I plead with you to increase your spiritual capacity to receive revelation.[96]

We can leverage the knowledge gained through identifying these patterns into a greater understanding about the methods and purposes of God and choose to repent and incorporate the word of God into our lives (in our efforts to become seed of the woman) so that we can receive the Spirit and the revelations that accompany the Spirit.

[Author’s Note: I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and editorial staff of Interpreter for their assistance in editing this article. Godfrey Ellis, my Executive Editor, deserves particular mention as he spent many hours reviewing, providing suggestions, aiding to clarify, structuring, and wording things so that the final article is much more coherent and intelligible than would otherwise be the case. I am very grateful for his assistance.]

1. Austin Cline, “Absurdity of a Talking Snake in the Garden of Eden,” Learn Religions (blog), 9 March 2019, learnreligions.com/absurdity-of-a-talking-snake-247969.

2. Stanley N. Rosenbaum, “Israelite Homicide Law and the Term ‘Enmity’ in Genesis 3:15,” Journal of Law and Religion 2, no. 1 (1984): 146.

3. John L. Ronning, “The Curse on the Serpent (Genesis 3:15) in Biblical Theology and Hermeneutics,” (PhD diss., Westminster Theological Seminary, 1997), 33. Note that the seed of the serpent may also be known as the “devil’s seed,” “child of the devil,” or “child of hell.”

4. There is some debate about what is meant when a text is said to be interpreted “literally” as opposed to “figuratively,” and this debate extends to definitions of biblical orthodoxy or biblical liberalism. See Adam S. Miller, “Introduction: On Biblical Literalism,” in Fleeing the Garden: Reading Genesis 2–3, ed. Adam S. Miller (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2017), 1, scholarsarchive.byu.edu/mi/37.

5. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1948), 33.

6. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 102.

7. Julie M. Smith, “Paradoxes in Paradise,” in Miller, Fleeing the Garden, 37, scholarsarchive.byu.edu/mi/37.

8. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 92.

9. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 1.

10. Smith, “Paradoxes in Paradise,” 11.

11. Miller, “On Biblical Literalism,” 1–2.

12. Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 2nd ed. (New York: Basic Books, 2011), 116.

13. Yairah Amit, “The Multi-Purpose ‘Leading Word’ and the Problems of Its Usage,” Prooftexts 9, no. 2 (1989): 100.

14. Noel B. Reynolds, “Chiastic Structuring of Large Texts: Second Nephi as a Case Study,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 41 (2020): 193–210, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/chiastic-structuring-of-large-texts-second-nephi-as-a-case-study/.

15. Buber and Rosenzweig went so far in their study of lead-words as to create a special translation of the Bible with an emphasis on preserving the lead-words by choosing to always translate the same or similar words in the exact same way within a given narrative. See Leora Batnitzky, “Translation as Transcendence: A Glimpse into the Workshop of the Buber-Rosenzweig Bible Translation,” New German Critique, no. 70 (Winter 1997): 88, doi.org/10.2307/488500.

16. Jonathan M. Cheek, “Bruising, Crushing, or Striking: The Translation of שוף and the Promise of Victory in Genesis 3:15,” Journal of Biblical Theology and Worldview 2, no. 1 (Fall 2021): 19.

17. Alter, Biblical Narrative, 117–118.

18. For example, in Moses 5:16–17, Cain refuses to hearken to the words of the Lord, but Abel hearkens to the voice of the Lord.

19. Ronald Hendel, “Leitwort Style and Literary Structure in the J Primeval Narrative,” in Sacred History, Sacred Literature: Essays on Ancient Israel, the Bible, and Religion in Honor of R. E. Friedman on His Sixtieth Birthday, ed. Shawna Dolansky (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 98.

20. Hendel, “Leitwort Style,” 99.

21. Hendel, “Leitwort Style,” 99.

22. Alter, Biblical Narrative, 76.

23. Alan Goff, “Types of Repetition and Shadows of History in Hebraic Narrative,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 45 (2021): 278, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/types-of-repetition-and-shadows-of-history-in-hebraic-narrative/.

24. For the sake of economy of space and to aid discussion, I will occasionally refer to the motif of the “seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman” as simply the “seed motif.”

25. A. Lukyn Williams, Justin Martyr: The Dialogue with Trypho, Translation, Introduction, and Notes (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; New York: Macmillan, 1930), 78.

26. Williams, Justin Martyr, 210.

27. Irenaeus, Against the Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 21, paragraph 1, newadvent.org/fathers/0103521.htm.

28. Rosenbaum, “Israelite Homicide Law,” 145.

29. Tom Nash, “Genesis 3:15: Who Crushes the Serpent’s Head?” Catholic Answers (blog), catholic.com/qa/genesis-315-who-crushes-the-serpents-head.

30. Charles Augustus Briggs, Messianic Prophecy: The Prediction of the Fulfilment of Redemption through the Messiah (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1886), 74–75.

31. Gordon J. Wenham, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 1, Genesis 1–15 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 80.

32. Brian A. Verrett, The Serpent in Samuel: A Messianic Motif (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2020) 16.

33. Christian C. Chigbundu, “In God’s Plan, Men and Women are Valued and Needed,” Liahona, September 2023, churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2023/09/afw-eng-local-pages/local-news-001.

34. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 72.

35. Knut Holter, “The Serpent in Eden as a Symbol of Israel’s Political Enemies: A Yahwistic Criticism of the Solomonic Foreign Policy?” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 1, (1990): 106–12.

36. Smith, “Paradoxes in Paradise,” 9.

37. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, 80.

38. “Compare Translations for Genesis 4:7,” Compare Translations, Bible, Bible Study Tools, accessed 26 April 2024, biblestudytools.com/genesis/4-7-compare.html.

39. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 171.

40. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 143–44.

41. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 162, 173.

42. See Stephen G. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: a Biblical Theology of the Hebrew Bible (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 32; Ronning, “The Curse on the Serpent,” 79–185; Gary A. Rendsburg, The Redaction of Genesis (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1986), 8–9.

43. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty, 62–70.

44. Russell M. Nelson, “Let God Prevail,” Liahona, November 2020, churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2020/10/46nelson.

45. James Hamilton, “The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 10, no. 2 (2006): 34–39.

46. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 165–66.

47. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 126–160.

48. Matthew L. Bowen, “Getting Cain and Gain,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 15 (2015): 139, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/getting-cain-and-gain/.

49. Smith, “Paradoxes in Paradise,” 10.

50. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 35.

51. Smith, “Paradoxes in Paradise,” 22.

52. Avram R. Shannon, “The Mark and Curse of Cain,” in Old Testament Cultural Insights, ed. Taylor Halverson (Springville, UT: Book of Mormon Central, 2022): 1.

53. Aaron P. Schade and Matthew L. Bowen, “Moses 5: Cain’s Offering and the Curse,” in The Book of Moses From the Ancient of Days to the Latter Days (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2021), 250.

54. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 41.

55. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 88.

56. Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part 1, From Adam to Noah (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1972), 211.

57. See Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent”; Verrett, Serpent in Samuel; and Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 30–54.

58. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 33.

59. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 87.

60. Claus Westermann, Genesis 37–50: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 2002), 37.

61. Verrett, Serpent in Samuel, 3.

62. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 286.

63. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 288.

64. Cheek, “Bruising, Crushing, or Striking,” 23.

65. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 249.

66. Bowen, “Cain and Gain,” 124.

67. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 34.

68. Verrett, Serpent in Samuel, 28.

69. Verrett, Serpent in Samuel, 30.

70. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 34.

71. Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, 74.

72. Verrett, Serpent in Samuel, 96.

73. Yonatan Grossman, “Leitwort (I),” Tanakh, Koschitsky Virtual Beit Midrash, Yeshivat Har Etzion, 24 January 2016, etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/studies-tanakh/literary-readings-tanakh/leitwort-i#:~:text=Since%20the%20time%20of%20Martin%20Buber%2C%20we%20customarily,something%20hiding%20beneath%20the%20surface%20of%20the%20text.

74. Jeff Lindsay, email message to author, 12 June 2024.

75. Hendel, “Leitwort Style,” 96.

76. Jeff Lindsay and Noel B. Reynolds, “‘Strong Like unto Moses’: The Case for Ancient Roots in the Book of Moses Based on Book of Mormon Usage of Related Content Apparently from the Brass Plates,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 44 (2021): 6, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/strong-like-unto-moses-the-case-for-ancient-roots-in-the-book-of-moses-based-on-book-of-mormon-usage-of-related-content-apparently-from-the-brass-plates/.

77. Lindsay and Reynolds, “Strong Like unto Moses,” 33.

78. Lindsay and Reynolds, “Strong Like unto Moses,” 9–11.

79. Lindsay and Reynolds, “Strong Like unto Moses,” 38.

80. Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 156.

81. Noel B. Reynolds, “A Backstory for the Brass Plates,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 53 (2022): 223, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/a-backstory-for-the-brass-plates/.

82. A. Keith Thompson, “The Brass Plates: Can Modern Scholarship Help Identify Their Contents?” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 45 (2021): 81–114, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-brass-plates-can-modern-scholarship-help-identify-their-contents/.

83. Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Genesis, 1:142–43.

84. As discussed in greater detail below, the curse described by Alma is always self-imposed. There is no genetic or racial component to a curse imposed by God.

85. The usage of a curse in so many different instances of the seed motif also refutes that idea that the curse is a racial item, which is a recent and erroneous concern and has been debunked in recent articles. See T. J. Uriona, “‘Life and Death, Blessing and Cursing’: New Context for ‘Skin of Blackness’ in the Book of Mormon,” BYU Studies 62, no. 3 (2023): 121–40; Clifford P. Jones, “Review of Two New Theories about the Lamanite Mark Recently Presented in Two Different Forums,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 61 (2024): 144–64, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/review-of-two-new-theories-about-the-lamanite-mark-recently-presented-in-two-different-forums; and Gerrit M. Steenblik, “Demythicizing the Lamanites’ ‘Skin of Blackness,’” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 49 (2021): 167–258, journal.interpreterfoundation.org/demythicizing-the-lamanites-skin-of-blackness.

86. Lindsay and Reynolds, “Strong Like unto Moses,” 33.

87. Lindsay and Reynolds, “Strong Like unto Moses,” 51.

88. Book of Mormon Onomasticon, s.v. “Zeram,” last edited 29 November 2023, onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php?title=ZERAM.

89. Book of Mormon Onomasticon, s.v. “Zerahemnah,” last edited 29 November 2023, onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php?title=ZERAHEMNAH.

90. Verrett, Serpent in Samuel, 26.

91. Val Larsen, “Killing Laban: The Birth of Sovereignty in the Nephite Constitutional Order,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 16, no. 1 (2007): 36, scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol16/iss1/5.

92. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 34.

93. Ben McGuire, “Nephi and Goliath: A Case Study of Literary Allusion in the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 18, no. 1 (2009): 15, scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol18/iss1/12.

94. Hamilton, “Seed of the Woman,” 35.

95. This attribute is only touched upon lightly in this article but mentioned by Ronning in connection with Cain. See Ronning, “Curse on the Serpent,” 117–19.

96. Russell M. Nelson, “Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives,” Liahona, April 2018, churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/04/revelation-for-the-church-revelation-for-our-lives.

Contents