Creationist Wisdom #113: The Serpent Revisited

Adam, Eve, & the Serpent

WE herewith continue our review of a fascinating series of articles on the Serpent in the Garden, which appears at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of creationist wisdom.

To bring you up to date on this foundational study of creation science, our first post was here: Do Creationists Think?, dealing with the question of whether the Serpent had legs. That was followed by Creationist Wisdom #110: The Serpent, which addressed the anomaly of a talking snake.

Today we present to you, dear reader, some excerpts from AIG’s latest contribution to this important series: Was Satan the Actual Serpent in the Garden? The article begins, as a scholarly scientific study should, with a discussion of the data.

This interpretation primarily comes from Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 without much regard to other passages, such as Genesis 3.

Revelation 12:9
So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Revelation 20:2
He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

Then AIG carefully explains why they focus on those New Testament passages, which aren’t in Genesis, to understand what happened back in the Garden of Eden. The bold font was added by us:

These verses give excellent information about Satan and his many names as well as his involvement back in Eden, being the serpent of old. But does this eliminate that he used a real serpent? Not necessarily. The whole of Scripture needs to be consulted.

We read in Genesis 3 that there was a real serpent and it received a real physical curse to crawl on its belly and eat dust for the duration of its life (Genesis 3:14). Satan is not a physical being, although he can operate in the physical realm (Job 1–2). He is a spiritual being that operates in the spiritual realm as evidenced in many passages that detail his spiritual attributes, such as …

[We’re skipping those passages, but you can click over to AIG and check them for yourself.]

It is impressive that AIG has not only chosen the most relevant passages, but that they describe their thinking for us. Surely then, we can have confidence in their conclusions. Let’s read on, as the article deals with the issue at hand:

The Bible seems to portray Satan and his angels as disembodied spirits. So then, how can both Satan and a real serpent be the culprit? From other passages [which we’ll skip] we find an important principle. Satan and demons can enter into people and animals and influence them.

An important principle indeed! Keep it in mind as we continue:

So there is no stretch to understand that the Lord is speaking to the serpent and Satan in Genesis 3. Genesis 3:14 is said to the serpent and then Genesis 3:15 is said to Satan who is influencing the serpent.

We don’t fully understand that, but we admit that our mastery of creation science is woefully insufficient for this mighty subject. Here’s more:

Martin Luther states it this way:

Let us therefore, establish in the first place that the serpent is a real serpent, but one that has been entered and taken over by Satan, . . .

Ah, that explains it! Here’s the conclusion:

The Bible tells us that Satan used a real serpent to deceive Eve. And because of his entrance into the serpent, he can rightly be called the “serpent of old” or “great dragon” in Revelation.

So there you are. It was a real serpent that spoke to Eve, but one that was possessed by the devil. Now we understand. All the consequences of the Fall of Man — death, damnation, the corruption and degeneration of this world — it’s all the devil’s fault!

Again, we point out the extra-ordinary care that AIG takes with their studies. How then can we question them when they tell us about the reality of Noah’s Ark and the falsity of Darwin’s theory? Remember this lesson as you struggle to resist the materialistic temptation of modern science, for that too is undoubtedly the devil’s work.

Copyright © 2010. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

8 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #113: The Serpent Revisited

  1. Gotta feel for the snake in all this. It was entirely innocent according to them, yet suffers a curse for it. Much like a lot of characters in the Bible. Job for example. Lost his family, his home, and was covered in a variety of sicknesses for what amounted to a wager between God and the Devil. When he gets angry about the whole thing, God chews him out and basically tells him “You’re weak. I’m powerful. Deal with it.” Fun little story actually and very revealing of the creationists “god.” Right and wrong, truth or falsehood, good and evil don’t apply to him since he has the power to do whatever he wants. Kinda scary actually.

  2. Albanaeon says: “Gotta feel for the snake in all this.”

    The snake? What about the people? They had just been created. They were ignorant. They had no experience with tricksters. The devil had been around forever. Adam & Eve were no match for him. So they got suckered and now look at the mess we’re in.

  3. Maybe I’m just cynical but I doubt AIG’s motive in such articles is to reassure the faithful that ‘serpent’ means an actual snake. IMO its merely a way to introduce the possession argument. This argument can then be used to dehumanize people they don’t like (its a demon, not a person) while at the same time allowing them to hypocritically forgive their own people regardless of what heinous crime they commit (he was possessed, it wasn’t his fault).

  4. I’m sooooo confused. I don’t remember any mention of Satan in the Bible before he used a serpent to tempt Eve. Where did Satan come from? If everything was “Good” before “The Fall”, where did such evil come from?

  5. Michael Fugate

    Here in western North America, it would have coyote instead of snake. Maybe the devil takes on different forms for different populations – maybe AiG and ICR can do a genetic analysis to look for the “what form does the devil take” allele.

  6. Eric’s got the right idea. If you buy the possession argument, then anybody you disagree with can be dismissed as a spokesman for Hell — including our gentle Curmudgeon — regardless of how logical or learned his argument is (in fact, articulate argument is just more evidence of Satanic influence!)

  7. Hey Curdge, just about everyone except God and the Devil are blameless in the whole affair, and the Devil was giving knowledge, which is a good thing for us enlightened folks. So where does that leave our little literal mythology tale? God is the prick who’s dumb enough to leave handicapped people with dangerous objects and roaming evil/enlightened beings and then has a hissy-fit when something goes wrong and curses the entirety of existence for it. This is why “literal” readings of the Bible are so funny. Why would anyone want to worship such a cosmic (insert appropriate crude description).

  8. ohioobserver notes

    If you buy the possession argument, then anybody you disagree with can be dismissed as a spokesman for Hell — including our gentle Curmudgeon

    In fact, the Curmudgeon has already confessed his true diabolical identity.

    Not that we were surprised…