Do people think the Snake of Genesis was Satan?
By pastorkayte
@pastorkayte (2255)
United States
March 10, 2010 12:23pm CST
I was asked this questions many times in the last few months. There is three schools of thought. One is that Satan came into the body of the snake or in the form of a snake and spoke to Eve, another believes that the snake was a minion of the devil and that he was instructed to confuse Eve. Some believe that because animals could speak at that time that a snake actually asked Eve these questions. However lets look at the bible.
There are two things that I looked at before I decided that it must have been Satan in the form of a snake.
One thing is that at first had me confused was that the bible said:
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God has made.
Which made me think that the serpent could have just been a snake, because when he spoke to Eve she was never discribed as being surprised that this animal spoke to her, she did not jump and run in fear and she answered its questions like you would a friend.
However the first indication of Jesus is written in this story, and the serpent describes the epic fight coming when Jesus and the devil get together.
Gen 3:15 I will but enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers, he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.
This I believe means that you and the woman will be enemies, and your offspring (devil and those who follow him) and hers (Jesus, being that he will be the only child to every be born of a woman without the help of a man) and he (Jesus) will crush your head (in the fight between Satan and Jesus) and you will stike his heel (Satan will try to take as many people who follow him as possible).
What do you think of this?
3 people like this
6 responses
@ronaldinu (12422)
• Malta
10 Mar 10
I am a Catholic so I am giving my point of view from this point of view. Before trying to understand this passage one has to understand by whom the book of Genesis was written? For which audience was the book written? In which style was the book written? I don't think its wise to interpret a book written 2000 years old without knowing certain facts beforehand.
There is no known human author of the book of Genesis. There was the oral tradition when the Jewish people who were still nomads used to tell stories of how God has protected them over the years. There is the writing tradition where certain stories were being written so that they will not be lost. Finally there was an editor who put all stories in a book in a form known to us now.
I believe that the snake represented temptation. In Genesis Adam and Eve decided to go against God's will and take the fruit from the tree that God forbid them. I believe that the story of Adam and Eve is the truth. The truth in the religious meaning of it. I believe that the Bible is the word of God and that God does not lie to us. However it is another story if Adam and Eve existed in real life or represented the first man and woman.
@urbandekay (18278)
•
11 Mar 10
Pasterkayte, you say you know that the story was supposed to represent historical events, how do you know?
all the best urban
@pastorkayte (2255)
• United States
11 Mar 10
Urban you know that the books written by Moses were and always have been the historical books of the bible, the actual books of moses were found and the Jews have followed it since before the birth of Christ until today. One of the things that most religions believe is that the books of Moses were true, though many are under the impression that the new testament is not real very few argue that the Old testament is wrong, for thousands of years people have been researching, archaeologists have found proof, and many writings from people have shown that no one has truly disagreed with the old testaments with the exception of Science. However if Science says that the Creation and much of what is says is a fairy tale, it can also be said of the Scientific version, in which a big bang created the earth in its entirety. My brother says maybe they are right and Gods voice sounds like a big bang. The second thing is that they are saying that we were born from a soup that contained genetic codes for all creatures, however even if what they say were to be true, then out of that would have had to come the first man and the first woman right Adam and Eve, so my belief is that even with Science, and everyone else the bible still ends up being true, and the truth of it is more than likely.
@pastorkayte (2255)
• United States
11 Mar 10
The book was written by Moses, it was supposed to represent historical events and it was written to the Jewish students of God. These facts I know of, I have learned to interpret everything as literal, however in some cases I look at the whole picture. The temptation as you so eloquently said could have been a standing creature who spoke, or some such thing, however I was not there and so if I believe the story to be true I am going to have to interpret whether I believe the story, or if I believe it to be allegory, which I do not. I believe an actual serpent, spoke to an actual Eve who tempted an actual Adam. I think however that the serpent was possibly different from what we think of as a serpent until he was cursed. Not sure still cant prove it though.
@urbandekay (18278)
•
10 Mar 10
It is an allegory and not meant to be taken literally, therefore then question does not arise
all the best urban
@owlwings (43910)
• Cambridge, England
10 Mar 10
The question is all the more potent BECAUSE it's an allegory (or what people these days call a myth or a fairy story). It should certainly not be understood to be a literal, factual account of the way things happened (such as you might find published in a newspaper today).
The problem is that, in the modern world, the power and message present in poetry, drama and works of fiction is often relegated to a different category than 'religion'. Some people (quite a small body, it has to be said) insist that every word in the Bible (that is to say, every collection of letters surrounded by spaces or punctuation, translated, as it is, into English - and 'translated' actually means 'interpreted') is the 'actual Word of God' and cannot be gainsaid; cannot be seen as anything other than the 'actual' truth ... and those people see 'truth' as meaning the sort of story that you might expect to see in a history book (in spite of the fact that 'history' is frequently known to be 'skewed' in favour of the persons reporting it!)
The Bible (or at least those books of it which were selected by the early Church to be 'suitable' for inclusion) is a gallimaufry of traditional stories, oral history, poetry, edited and re-written personal accounts of events, letters and descriptions of dreams. As a whole, it is just a fraction of what was written down by sincere and God-loving/fearing men. Much of it was entirely lost (though some has survived as 'apocryphal') because of editing by people who had, by then, formed a theology which was already radically different from that of the early Christians and that of the Jews who were followers of Jesus.
@urbandekay (18278)
•
10 Mar 10
Well, on much we agree, the account contains much truth about man's nature not about his origin. Given that why then do you consider that the question is therefore more poignant?
all the best urban
@owlwings (43910)
• Cambridge, England
10 Mar 10
The 'three schools of thought' that you refer to all seem to belong to the faction that believes that every single story in the Bible is literal, factual truth. I suspect that very few of those people will not have enjoyed (or have enjoyed reading to their children) 'bedtime stories' of the nature of 'Cinderella', 'The Three Little Pigs' or 'Snow White'.
I can't understand why the same people who see nothing wrong with these 'children's fairy stories' do not understand that God, Himself, knows the power of allegory and parable and frequently, in the book of 'His Word', uses that device to convey the Truth.
If you devoutly believed that there were once three little pigs who could really speak English, had the skills to build houses of straw, sticks and brick and be clever enough to outwit the Big Bad Wolf, you would probably be universally be judged 'a little touched' (to put it mildly). Why, then, do the same people who read these stories to their children, at the same time claim so loudly that the story of Adam and Eve and the Serpent is the literal truth?
Perhaps, PastorKayte, you are not one of those. Perhaps you are one who understands that this story is just one of many Creation myths but yet has to deal kindly with people who still believe it to be literal truth.
@Bloggership (1104)
• Indonesia
11 Mar 10
I believe that snake was satan or lucifer... Well, and believe too that satan can also turn into any form... You right, satan will take as many as he could to make peoples fall in sin... I a man with many sin, but i'm glad i believe in Jesus... I'm was save now...
@ChrisEven (46)
• Chile
10 Mar 10
Yeah I think the spirits (animals) could talk and have language, but the snake were more inteligent because it was satan in it, I mean satan was a great angel like Gabriel and have a great mind, of course it was going to be more smart than animals that's a proof that he was just disguised like a creature of God =) i think this is the truth about it.
•
11 Mar 10
yes ma'am i know that the snake in geneses is Satan because Satan is the sin of our life he broke our life but now i have a problem i never get out of my problem right now what could i have to do......
