Was the Serpent in Genesis 3 a Literal Snake?

[Scripture More Accurately]

I take it you are agreeing, a manifestation of a creature fits the bill.

Here is the question that should be asked, why did God curse the snake, when it was Satan who did wrong? I think to create an icon for Satan, so that down through time, people would be reminded of the wickedness of Satan.

No, I am not agreeing that " a manifestation of a creature fits the bill." The serpent existed as a real, physical being who was completely distinct and separate from Satan before Satan used it to deceive Eve.

 

[Van]

No, I am not agreeing that " a manifestation of a creature fits the bill." The serpent existed as a real, physical being who was completely distinct and separate from Satan before Satan used him to deceive Eve.

I see we are done.

 

[Van]

Revelations 12:9
And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Here we see that "the serpent" is called the "great dragon" before the Garden.

Revelations 20:2
And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

Here we see "the serpent" is Satan and not a reptile.

Conclusion, snakes were made icons of Satan.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Revelations 12:9
And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Here we see that "the serpent" is called the "great dragon" before the Garden.

Revelations 20:2
And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

Here we see "the serpent" is Satan and not a reptile.

Conclusion, snakes were made icons of Satan.

Using these passages to say that "snakes were made icons of Satan" does not explain what Genesis 3:14 says.

Genesis 3:14 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:

Speaking directly to the serpent, God says specifically that the serpent was cursed because of what it had done and contrasts its cursing with all the cattle and every beast of the field. Comparing Satan to the other beasts of the field would make no sense if the serpent was merely Satan appearing in the form of a serpent.

Moreover, the curse on the serpent included that it would go on its belly and eat dust all the days of its life. To say that Satan now goes on his belly and eats dust . . .

 

[George Antonios]

Genesis 3:1 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?

Some believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was not a literal snake. They believe that Satan appeared to Eve in a snake-like form.

Other believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was a literal snake whom Satan somehow directed to deceive Eve.

Do you believe that this serpent was a literal snake?

and he said unto the woman Was this a regular serpent of the field? Satan is called the serpent (Job 26:13; Isa.27:1; Rev.12:9, 14 and 20:2). Revelation 12:14 refers to Satan after his future fall and incarnation as a man in the person of the antichrist (Rev.12:9/13) as the serpent. Israel is said to flee from the face of the serpent (Rev.12:14) when she is fleeing from the literal face of the antichrist, who will be a man. So serpent can refer to a man. But that doesn’t necessarilly mean that Eve was speaking to humanoid. For one thing, the serpent is introduced as being part of the beasts of the field (v.1). For another, the serpent is cursed anatomically in v.14, implying that Even was speaking to an anatomical serpent. The serpent is cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field, and is to go on his belly from thereon. So at this point, the serpent is classified among cattle. Cattle go on four legs and are distinguished from any creeping thing (1:23). Exodus 9:3 defines cattle to include at least five four-footed beasts: 1. horses 2. asses 3. camels 4. oxen 5. sheep. Exodus 10:26 seems to define as cattle anything that has an hoof – thereby excluding camels although that is not clear in Genesis 31:17-18. Do you know what we call a serpent with legs? A dragon. Indeed the connection to cattle goes further than pre-fall animal anatomy. Cherubims have four faces a piece: lion, eagle, ox/calf, and man; yet of all four Ezekiel says that the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot (Ez.1:7). Since Satan is a Cherub (Ez.28:14) his feet are like the sole of a calf’s foot thereby classifying him – the serpent– with cattle; implying that that serpent here was Satan himself. Satan did possess Peter and Judas, so it seems Satan possessed a pre-fall serpent - with legs and possibly wings withal.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

and he said unto the woman Was this a regular serpent of the field? Satan is called the serpent (Job 26:13; Isa.27:1; Rev.12:9, 14 and 20:2). Revelation 12:14 refers to Satan after his future fall and incarnation as a man in the person of the antichrist (Rev.12:9/13) as the serpent. Israel is said to flee from the face of the serpent (Rev.12:14) when she is fleeing from the literal face of the antichrist, who will be a man. So serpent can refer to a man. But that doesn’t necessarilly mean that Eve was speaking to humanoid. For one thing, the serpent is introduced as being part of the beasts of the field (v.1). For another, the serpent is cursed anatomically in v.14, implying that Even was speaking to an anatomical serpent. The serpent is cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field, and is to go on his belly from thereon. So at this point, the serpent is classified among cattle. Cattle go on four legs and are distinguished from any creeping thing (1:23). Exodus 9:3 defines cattle to include at least five four-footed beasts: 1. horses 2. asses 3. camels 4. oxen 5. sheep. Exodus 10:26 seems to define as cattle anything that has an hoof – thereby excluding camels although that is not clear in Genesis 31:17-18. Do you know what we call a serpent with legs? A dragon. Indeed the connection to cattle goes further than pre-fall animal anatomy. Cherubims have four faces a piece: lion, eagle, ox/calf, and man; yet of all four Ezekiel says that the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot (Ez.1:7). Since Satan is a Cherub (Ez.28:14) his feet are like the sole of a calf’s foot thereby classifying him – the serpent– with cattle; implying that that serpent here was Satan himself. Satan did possess Peter and Judas, so it seems Satan possessed a pre-fall serpent - with legs and possibly wings withal.

Interesting argumentation. The detail and length of your response will require careful study to evaluate its validity. I'll have to get back to you on this. Thanks.

 

[Revmitchell]

Genesis 3:1 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?

Some believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was not a literal snake. They believe that Satan appeared to Eve in a snake-like form.

Other believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was a literal snake whom Satan somehow directed to deceive Eve.

Do you believe that this serpent was a literal snake?

It doesnt matter

 

[Van]

Using these passages to say that "snakes were made icons of Satan" does not explain what Genesis 3:14 says.

Genesis 3:14 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:

Speaking directly to the serpent, God says specifically that the serpent was cursed because of what it had done and contrasts its cursing with all the cattle and every beast of the field. Comparing Satan to the other beasts of the field would make no sense if the serpent was merely Satan appearing in the form of a serpent.

Moreover, the curse on the serpent included that it would go on its belly and eat dust all the days of its life. To say that Satan now goes on his belly and eats dust . . .

I am sure you have a point in there somewhere...
1) Did a creature do something bad, or did Satan manifesting himself as a creature do something bad? Satan, not the creature.
2) You can say "creating an icon for Satan" does not explain Genesis 3:14, but does a better job than other views.
3) Did anyone say Satan was turned into a snake? Nope.

God is saying to the serpent (a manifestation of Satan) because you (Satan) have done this, you (the snake manifested) shall go on your belly...

If you have a better explanation, fine.

 

[MB]

Genesis 3:1 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?

Some believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was not a literal snake. They believe that Satan appeared to Eve in a snake-like form.

Other believers hold that the serpent in Genesis 3 was a literal snake whom Satan somehow directed to deceive Eve.

Do you believe that this serpent was a literal snake?

Absolutely. Satan entered the snake.
MB

 

[Calminian]

It was indeed the original snake God made, or one of the kinds of snakes He originally made. Baraminologists believe there are 3 basic kinds of snakes which all species are derived from. At least some believe this.

Most creationists believe the snake in the garden originally had legs, which God removed after the Fall. It's likely God altered many animals after the Fall, indicated by the phrase "above all livestock."

Gen. 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.​

The implication is that it was altered after the Curse along with other animals. This is in line with Jewish tradition. Josephus believe God took the Serpents speech away and put venom under his tongue.

Antiq. 1:50 (1.1.4) He also deprived the serpent of speech, out of indignation at his malicious disposition towards Adam. Besides this, he inserted poison under his tongue, and made him an enemy to man; and suggested to them that they should direct their strokes against his head, that being the place wherein lay his mischievous designs towards men, and it being easiest to take vengeance on him that way: and when he had deprived him of the use of his feet, and made him go rolling all along, and dragging himself upon the ground.​

Josephus believed other animals had speech before the Fall.

Antiq. 1:41 (1.1.4) But while all the living creatures had one language,5 at that time the serpent, which then lived together with Adam and his wife, showed an envious disposition, at his supposal of their living happily, and in obedience to the commands of God;​

This all happened before the first animal death, so none of these traits were passed on to descendants.

 

[Calminian]

It was indeed the original snake God made, or one of the kinds of snakes He originally made. Baraminologists believe there are 3 basic kinds of snakes which all species are derived from. At least some believe this.

Most creationists believe the snake in the garden originally had legs, which God removed after the Fall. It's likely God altered many animals after the Fall, indicated by the phrase "above all livestock."

Gen. 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.​

The implication is that it was altered after the Curse along with other animals. This is in line with Jewish tradition. Josephus believe God took the Serpents speech away and put venom under his tongue.

Antiq. 1:50 (1.1.4) He also deprived the serpent of speech, out of indignation at his malicious disposition towards Adam. Besides this, he inserted poison under his tongue, and made him an enemy to man; and suggested to them that they should direct their strokes against his head, that being the place wherein lay his mischievous designs towards men, and it being easiest to take vengeance on him that way: and when he had deprived him of the use of his feet, and made him go rolling all along, and dragging himself upon the ground.​

Josephus believed other animals had speech before the Fall.

Antiq. 1:41 (1.1.4) But while all the living creatures had one language,5 at that time the serpent, which then lived together with Adam and his wife, showed an envious disposition, at his supposal of their living happily, and in obedience to the commands of God;​

This all happened before the first animal death, so none of these traits were passed on to descendants.

The Serpent was Satan in the sense that Satan incited him to speak deceptive words to Eve. We see this incitement with humans thereafter, from the prince of Tyre to David to Peter.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

It was indeed the original snake God made, or one of the kinds of snakes He originally made. Baraminologists believe there are 3 basic kinds of snakes which all species are derived from. At least some believe this.

Most creationists believe the snake in the garden originally had legs, which God removed after the Fall. It's likely God altered many animals after the Fall, indicated by the phrase "above all livestock."

Gen. 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.​

The implication is that it was altered after the Curse along with other animals. This is in line with Jewish tradition. Josephus believe God took the Serpents speech away and put venom under his tongue.

Antiq. 1:50 (1.1.4) He also deprived the serpent of speech, out of indignation at his malicious disposition towards Adam. Besides this, he inserted poison under his tongue, and made him an enemy to man; and suggested to them that they should direct their strokes against his head, that being the place wherein lay his mischievous designs towards men, and it being easiest to take vengeance on him that way: and when he had deprived him of the use of his feet, and made him go rolling all along, and dragging himself upon the ground.​

Josephus believed other animals had speech before the Fall.

Antiq. 1:41 (1.1.4) But while all the living creatures had one language,5 at that time the serpent, which then lived together with Adam and his wife, showed an envious disposition, at his supposal of their living happily, and in obedience to the commands of God;​

This all happened before the first animal death, so none of these traits were passed on to descendants.

The information from Josephus is fascinating. Thanks.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

I am sure you have a point in there somewhere...
1) Did a creature do something bad, or did Satan manifesting himself as a creature do something bad? Satan, not the creature.
2) You can say "creating an icon for Satan" does not explain Genesis 3:14, but does a better job than other views.
3) Did anyone say Satan was turned into a snake? Nope.

God is saying to the serpent (a manifestation of Satan) because you (Satan) have done this, you (the snake manifested) shall go on your belly...

If you have a better explanation, fine.

I do not understand the way that you are using the word "manifestation" in this reply so I do not how to respond to this reply.

 

[Calminian]

The information from Josephus is fascinating. Thanks.

Yeah, I agree. Not authoritative, but an insightful regarding ancient Jewish thought and tradition.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

The Serpent was Satan in the sense that Satan incited him to speak deceptive words to Eve. We see this incitement with humans thereafter, from the prince of Tyre to David to Peter.

If you believe this, do you also believe that it was not just Satan who sinned but also the serpent sinned when it spoke those deceptive words to Eve?

 

[Calminian]

If you believe this, do you also believe that it was not just Satan who sinned but also the serpent sinned when it spoke those deceptive words to Eve?

No. Animals don't have moral awareness and responsibility like men. The physical curse placed on the snake was symbolic of the curse on Satan. Snakes are very successful animals without legs, one of the most successful kinds in the world. They don't feel shame or remorse over their actions.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

No. Animals don't have moral awareness and responsibility like men. The physical curse placed on the snake was symbolic of the curse on Satan. Snakes are very successful animals without legs, one of the most successful kinds in the world. They don't feel shame or remorse over their actions.

I have to disagree. Genesis 3:14 specifically say that God told the serpent that it would be cursed because of what it had done. When God as the Judge curses someone or something for doing something, He is punishing them for doing wrong.

If a physical serpent was cursed by having physical changes imposed upon it, God was holding that physical serpent responsible for its evildoing.

In addition, the passage begins by specifying that the serpent was more crafty then all the other beasts of the field that God had made. God revealed that to us in Genesis 3:1 for our profit, and our understanding of what the passage reveals must reflect fully what God has revealed.

 

[Calminian]

I have to disagree. Genesis 3:14 specifically say that God told the serpent that it would be cursed because of what it had done. When God as the Judge curses someone or something for doing something, He is punishing them for doing wrong.

If a physical serpent was cursed by having physical changes imposed upon it, God was holding that physical serpent responsible for its evildoing.

He was, but not on the sense he holds morally aware humans responsible. The serpent was not made in God's image. Snakes are not going to be eternally punished. And the removal of his legs was real, but had spiritual symbolism in regard to Satan who incited him.

In addition, the passage begins by specifying that the serpent was more crafty then all the other beasts of the field that God had made. God revealed that to us in Genesis 3:1 for our profit, and our understanding of what the passage reveals must reflect fully what God has revealed.

Yes, before the Fall, the snakes were much higher up on the intelligence scale, which made him a good choice to incite. They lost in intelligence after the fall, more so than other animals. Scripture laters tells us the Satan was the Serpent of old.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

He was, but not on the sense he holds morally aware humans responsible. The serpent was not made in God's image. Snakes are not going to be eternally punished. And the removal of his legs was real, but had spiritual symbolism in regard to Satan who incited him.

Scripture never says that angels were made in God's image. Yet, God punishes them for their wrongdoing so I do not think that saying that the serpent was not made in God's image is relevant.

 

[Calminian]

Scripture never says that angels were made in God's image. Yet, God punishes them for their wrongdoing so I do not think that saying that the serpent was not made in God's image is relevant.

Angels are in the image of God. They're called sons of God, among other names. They are morally aware beings, created directly by God. Adam is also called the son of God, being directly created (Luke 3:38), but he's the only one, since we're the result of procreation. We are sons of Adam until we accept Christ and become children of God by adoption.

Animals, for sure, are not made in the image of God. The contrast is clear in Genesis 1.