Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Welcome to Christforums the Protestant Community. You'll need to register in order to post your comments on your favorite topics and subjects. You'll also enjoy sharing media across multiple platforms. We hope you enjoy your fellowship here! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christforums

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy. God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now
Sign in to follow this  
2404

Genesis.3:14

Recommended Posts

"Upon thy belly shalt thou go"

 

Did the Serpent have legs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid I will answer your Bible query with biology: some snakes do actually have vestigial legs, although in most individuals they are now inside the skin. Pythons and boa constrictors both have legs bones embedded towards their tail ends, the remains of legs they presumably once walked on. Whether you believe it was God's curse or evolution that removed their legs, snakes used to walk.

 

It gets more complicated if you consider the debate over whether the serpent was the first serpent or the devil's disguise which is a theology debate I am not going into.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Upon thy belly shalt thou go"

 

Did the Serpent have legs?

 

There's no scriptural indication that the Serpent had legs. The Scriptures state that the curse would be “on your belly you shall go.” If we were to assume that there was some "other" form of locomotion happening then why not fly rather than walk? Could the serpent been some flying creature? Scripture doesn't state whether the serpent previously flew, walked, or slithered on its belly.

 

I am afraid I will answer your Bible query with biology: some snakes do actually have vestigial legs, although in most individuals they are now inside the skin. Pythons and boa constrictors both have legs bones embedded towards their tail ends, the remains of legs they presumably once walked on. Whether you believe it was God's curse or evolution that removed their legs, snakes used to walk.

 

From a Creationist's Perspective: http://creationtoday.org/do-snakes-a...ve-hind-limbs/

 

Evolutionists often try to find what they want to find, and many times end up ignoring the actual facts. This is what some scientists do concerning snake “legs.” Snakes have what appear to be the “stump” of legs toward the back of their bodies. Evolutionary scientists claim that snakes were once lizards, but due to the processes of evolution, they lost their legs, and now they are left with nothing but short, useless limbs that simply “stick out.”

 

Scientists have discovered that, like the whale, the snakes’ “legs” aid in their reproduction. But also, snakes use these short legs in fighting. Amazing! These “vestigial” organs are not vestigial at all. They all serve a purpose.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both good points.

Not along my way of thinking but thank you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say let's look at the passage and not add anything to it but ask some questions which could clear the matter up for us at least somewhat.

 

Does the verse say the serpent had legs? No.

 

Does the verse say that the serpent its legs? No.

 

Let's now look at the second part of the curse.

 

"dust you shall eat"

 

Do serpents actually eat dust? No.

 

Any thought?

 

Edited by Origen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would say let's look at the passage and not add anything to it but ask some questions which could clear the matter up for us at least somewhat.

 

Does the verse say the serpent had legs? No.

 

Does the verse say that the lost its legs? No.

 

Let's now look at the second part of the curse.

 

"dust you shall eat"

 

Do serpents actually eat dust? No.

 

Any thought?

 

 

My first thought is that this curse isn't placed on snakes in general, but that serpent of old, Satan.

 

The dust brings stirs up the imagery from the path of someone's feet walking..... the Messiah's coming!

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Like William said, it could have flown for all we know. "Dust you shall eat" just sounds like figurative language to me. Technically though, I bet some dirt/dust becomes ingested-as insignificant as that is. So even taken literally, it's true.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My first thought is that this curse isn't placed on snakes in general, but that serpent of old, Satan.

 

The dust brings stirs up the imagery from the path of someone's feet walking..... the Messiah's coming!

We have a winner! Dave, tell William what he has won.

 

"The proper exegesis award."

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now let's ask ourselves another question. What was the serpent's motives? What was he trying to get Adam and Eve to do by telling to disobey God?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now let's ask ourselves another question. What was the serpent's motives? What was he trying to get Adam and to do Eve by telling to disobey God?

 

To follow in his footsteps:

 

“Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols:

the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!

how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven,

I will exalt my throne above the stars of God:

I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.”

(Isaiah 14:11-15)

 

Now consider:

 

"In the account of the Fall in Gen 3, after which God offered hope through the redemptive work of the LORD Jesus Christ implied in v. 15, we may observe the correlation between Satan’s sinful ambition to what he tempted Adam and Eve with, which eventually led the couple to sin against God and caused the entire humanity to be totally and hopelessly depraved and under the same condemnation that Lucifer has as a result. The correlation is clearly seen in Gen 3:5, when Satan, disguised as a serpent, said to Eve, “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.” Here are the double lies being offered to Eve springing out of the same principle behind his botched coup attempt; first, that she would be like gods, and thus independent, able to rule over herself apart from God, and secondly, there is not one God, but many gods; each is sovereign over himself or herself." - A. Sutono

 

https://www.christforums.org/forum/c...idden-idolatry

 

Sound like "Free (Autonomous/Libertarian) Will? Now you have Pelagian/Arminian doctrine.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was trying to first get them to doubt God so that they might disobey God and create separation between them. Right?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was trying to first get them to doubt God so that they might disobey God and create separation between them. Right?

 

My thoughts,

 

I think Lucifer's desire was to be greater than God. When he failed and saw man's purpose and learned we are to even judge the angels (though he may not of been an 'angel' but rather a different heavenly creature (Seraph/Cherub), I can only imagine how that must of enraged Satan in his pride. To be so high, and brought low. Psalm 8:

 

8 O Lord, our Lord,

how majestic is your name in all the earth!

You have set your glory above the heavens.

2 Out of the mouth of babies and infants,

you have established strength because of your foes,

to still the enemy and the avenger.

3 When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,

the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,

4 what is man that you are mindful of him,

and the son of man that you care for him?

5 Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings

and crowned him with glory and honor.

6 You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;

you have put all things under his feet,

7 all sheep and oxen,

and also the beasts of the field,

8 the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,

whatever passes along the paths of the seas.

9 O Lord, our Lord,

how majestic is your name in all the earth!

 

In other words, if I were to speculate his motive I could easily suggest an act of jealousy.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To follow in his footsteps:

 

“Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols:

the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!

how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven,

I will exalt my throne above the stars of God:

I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.”

So he was usurping God's authority. He was trying to exalt himself. Now put that in context with the language of "going on your belly" and "eating dust." What does the language, given that understanding, mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So he was usurping God's authority. He was trying to exalt himself. Now put that in context with the language of "going on your belly" and "eating dust." What does the language, given that understanding, mean?

 

I posted right before you did. I think I answered it and will rest on what I posted. Satan committed self idolatry, and I believe both the two posts I made point to that.

 

Lucifer led a heavenly rebellion. He has done a wonderful job today, being a master craftsman at his trade by design.

 

I don't want to really allegorize the Scriptures, but Satan obviously bypassed Eve's obedience for empirical evidence and then reasoned away the commandment. Just to note, Satan himself didn't bear fruit, but it was strategic brilliance to put himself in a tree that did.

 

Your thoughts?

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I posted right before you did. I think I answered it and will rest on what I posted. Satan committed self idolatry, and I believe both the two posts I made point to that.

 

Lucifer led a heavenly rebellion. He has done a wonderful job today, being a master craftsman at his trade by design.

 

Your thoughts?

 

God bless,

William

No doubt but I am simply trying to understand the language within the context. By usurping God's authority he was exalting himself over his station. That self exalting had the opposite effect. Instead he is brought low, forced to the ground by the very one who's authority he was usurping. Now the language makes sense and there is no need to talk about if snakes had or did not have legs or if they really eat dirt or not.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No doubt but I am simply trying to understand the language within the context. By usurping God's authority he was exalting himself over his station. That self exalting had the opposite effect. Instead he is brought low, forced to the ground by the very one who's authority he was usurping.

 

And in response, perhaps he was trying to make man even lower? According to Psalm 8, which I turned to for its imagery, all things are under the feet of man - a vessel which God would use for the incarnation. Eh, mind just went off but I'll refrain lol.

 

But the beast of the field are under man's feet. And the serpent was made to eat the dust.... even lower than the beasts of the field.

 

You asked for motive, so you'll have to excuse some of my speculation. I agree with you though. If we are to judge angels, I wonder if it is a matter of what we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt? :eek: Get it? lol

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You asked for motive, so you'll have to excuse some of my speculation. I agree with you though. If we are to judge angels, I wonder if it is a matter of what we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt? :eek: Get it? lol
Got it. lol

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No doubt but I am simply trying to understand the language within the context. By usurping God's authority he was exalting himself over his station. That self exalting had the opposite effect. Instead he is brought low, forced to the ground by the very one who's authority he was usurping. Now the language makes sense and there is no need to talk about if snakes had or did not have legs or if they really eat dirt or not.

 

 

Yeah, didn't work out too well for that serpent.

 

Revelation 20:2 [2]And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really interesting. I never thought it this way. My thought also went with the first post - Did snakes have legs? And second - Do they eat dust? This was beyond my thinking. I really like to come here and read the thoughts. I have never tried to think deeply. Thank you all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Upon thy belly shalt thou go"

 

Did the Serpent have legs?

 

The serpent wasn't a reptile, he was a man.....a man of a different race than that of Adam and Eve....a race which is more subtle than all the races of mankind which the Lord God created. He seduced Eve, and caused her to sin. And because of that, God told him that he (his race) would "eat dust all the days of their lives", meaning that they would experience hunger and famine all the days of their lives.

 

This is the truth of which you inquire, but it's a truth which will never be accepted by the modern-day churches. Why? Because the modern-day churches glorifies (worships) that race of man called "man of lawlessness" in the scriptures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The serpent wasn't a reptile, he was a man.....a man of a different race than that of Adam and Eve....a race which is more subtle than all the races of mankind which the Lord God created.
The text does not claim he was man.

 

This is the truth of which you inquire, but it's a truth which will never be accepted by the modern-day churches. Why?
I will tell you why because the Scriptures do not support your claim. It is as simple as that.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The text does not claim he was man.

 

I will tell you why because the Scriptures do not support your claim. It is as simple as that.

 

And the Eisogesis award goes to...

 

fayec!

 

 

RS90s-cup-trophy.jpg.b8d6a201c9c2695959600683bf025c01.jpg

 

 

(Jokingly said, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The text does not claim he was man.

 

Yes it does. The serpent who seduced Eve was a flesh and blood man. He's also called the Devil, and Satan in Revelation 12:9.

 

 

I will tell you why because the Scriptures do not support your claim. It is as simple as that.

 

 

Uh, yeah they do. You need to study more of the scriptures.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uh, yeah they do. You need to study more of the scriptures.
Un, no they don't. Where is the word "man"?

 

And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×