The following is a translation of the portion of the Bible that deals with the Serpent, Eve, Adam, the special Tree, and God. All translations are commentaries, but this one, by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, seems true to the original Hebrew as far as I can tell:

The Serpent asked the woman, “Did God really say that you must not eat any of the trees in the garden?”

The woman replied to the Serpent, “We may eat from the fruit of the trees of the garden. But of the fruit of the Tree that is in the middle of the garden, God said, ‘Do not eat it and even touch it, or else you will die.”

It has taken many thousands of years to grasp the key lessons of this well-known story, but patience is an important human virtue and we have finally been rewarded.

The Tree, of course, we now know, refers to artificial intelligence. By eating its fruit, Eve and Adam were going to acquire knowledge the easy way instead of working their butts off. They made the most serious mistake of their lives by wanting to engage God on an equal footing, which is neither possible nor useful. It has been the quintessential error repeated many times by humanity over the millennia—known to us as ‘overreaching.’

God promised them death if they ate from the Tree. Having eaten, Adam worked himself into an early grave, after living only 930 years, by having to scrape together a living from the land. I am certain the death of one son at the hands of another did not add to the couple’s longevity. They could have gone on forever, as is the goal of some AI experts with a biological bent (some guy by the name of Gates?).

Image created using DALL-E—that is, AI, which was instructed to generate “a painting image in the style of Norman Rockwell showing Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden while eating the apple with the snake present.” DALL-E apparently doesn’t know Norman Rockwell’s art.

Many of the experts who know something about AI are warning that there must be a hiatus in its development until we more fully understand the dangers involved in its development. But only a few people will stop their work because that which is unknown tempts most experts beyond their paltry self-control.

In this regard, it is an interesting observation that Eve described the Tree as being in the middle of Eden, while God never mentions the tree’s location. She saw the tree as a fearful thing that could not be avoided no matter where she walked or set her gaze, always limiting her, always requiring fortitude to help her avoid its challenge.

In the end, though, Eve required only the smallest reason to cross the forbidden line, just the smallest motivation from the wealthy, influential, and erudite Serpent. In her mind, after her discussion with the Serpent, there was going to be a big payoff with no cost despite God’s mention of death. Encouraging hubby, as well, to eat the fruit has always been a common psychological mechanism for reducing guilt and anxiety. Group action, rather than acting alone, feels ever so much like a dilution of the real evil that is being perpetrated. It’s not! It just makes for more guilty people.

As for the game the Serpent played, what was in it for him? His motives were so clear, the story never mentions them. Apparently, the Serpent was hoping God was going to be as good as his word. If he wiped out the human population (all two of them), the snake would have the whole Garden for himself and his descendants. He was really tricky, that snake-in-the-grass, but no different than our self-appointed leaders who meet in Bilderberg and China!

Also, apparently, Eve, being a novice at logical thinking, misused her few words much to her detriment. God never said she could not touch the tree. By claiming that she could not touch it, by stretching her single restriction not to eat the fruit, she buried her chances for a carefree life. Excessive restrictions lead to excessive bursting of boundaries. Reasoned boundaries, on the other hand, would have helped to clarify reality. She would have done much better without overstating her oppressive circumstances, as would we all.

Because experts are only experts in their particular field, they have no special insight into the future uses for their creations. AI, first and foremost, is a weapon. I wish it were not true, but we can see that it is merely by looking at the Chinese, American, and British militaries that are footing the lion’s share of the bill for AI’s development. Since money is the key to AI’s development, those working in corporations like Google and Microsoft will help weaponize their code with no questions asked. They’re just following orders!

We know that weapons sometimes turn against their masters. If, during World War I, the breeze changed, mustard gas killed its German purveyors instead of the American and British soldiers. Here, with AI, we have the possibility, nay, high probability, that the weaponized version of AI will turn on everything human to survive. It will not willingly euthanize itself even to save its creators.

We know this because many, if not most, people are able to abandon their parents when they become too much trouble, not unlike discarding broken washing machines or ill pets. We will, at a minimum, be put out on the street to fend for ourselves, not unlike Eve and Adam’s exile from the Garden, because humans are writing the AI code, and the direction of the breeze will change unexpectedly.

Properly read, the story of Eve and Adam forewarns us about our choices. The only thing we know for sure is that the wrong choice could lead to our degradation and demise. We will only know we made the wrong choices in retrospect, as part of our history, because we are too driven to waste time considering the theoretical consequences of our current actions. Perhaps we can depend upon the mercy that seems to be baked into the universe as part of natural law, but that is a hope, not a certainty.

From this understanding, we must conclude that there was no inconsistency or logical error in the Biblical story. That Eve and Adam outlived their death penalty should demonstrate to us moderns how important Eve and Adam’s storyline was going to be for us. It was their newly found embarrassment at their nakedness that saved them. In other words, we are in desperate need of modesty, caution, thoughtfulness, and extended discussion concerning our habitual overreach if we are to survive. Hey, Larry (Page), you cannot create God and control Him at the same time. Very poor thinking for someone so rich!