And does that particular event in Eden mean He isn't favorable towards snakes (surely not having designed them Himself!)? Is Steve Urwin (and, in faith, I) going to have a nasty shock when it turns out, in the style of the 'Great Divorce', that lovely scaley things like lizards are turned into boring old stallions'?! Haha! (Actually, I like horses...)
closed as primarily opinion-based by ThaddeusB, Flimzy, Mr. Bultitude, Nathaniel, DJClayworth Oct 30 at 20:05
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
There are some passages where certain animals are praised in a way which emphasizes their dangerous nature.
The English "stately" is translating Hebrew "מֵיטִיבֵי", "they are doing good / they are pleasing". The ferocity of the lion is identified as worthy of admiration. Although they are dangerous, they are also royal beasts, and Jesus is identified using the metaphor of the lion (Revelation 5:5) as well as the lamb.
Some extended poetry of this kind occurs in the end of Job, in particular the account of Leviathan (Job 41). The strength of Leviathan is certainly ascribed to God's design, and the general tone of the passage seems to present the creature as a wonder (cf. Job 42:3). It is awe-inspiring, beyond human capacity to understand - though we can begin to consider God's greatness by contemplating the fact that he is the creator and master of Leviathan.
Snakes/serpents get a generally bad reputation, but that is not the whole story. Isaiah 11:8 points to God's sovereignty over a peaceful order of creation:
Human beings, and the devil, may be called by "bad" animal names - dragons, wolves, serpents, etc. This does not mean that wolves themselves are inherently bad, but only that their rapacious nature is being used as a metaphor. A nice contrast takes place with Jesus's words in Matthew 10:16,
As usual, the wolves are bad and the sheep are good; but here, the serpents and doves are both presented in a "good" context. (Unlike, say, "generation of vipers", Matthew 3:7 and 12:34, also from the mouth of Jesus.) So snakes are not always bad, even if they have some characteristics that we should not imitate. Moreover, as the Wisdom literature shows, even dangerous and terrifying creatures are part of God's design.
God Created all creatures a thing of beauty and in perfection.
As far as answering your question, Let's take a look at the passage in the Bible and see if it answers your question.
Genesis 3:1 through 5 KJV
What does the serpent was more suptil mean?
The original Hebrew word here is:
So in todays vernacular we would say that the serpent was more conniving, or that he was much less inclined to obey God.
In that vein of thought he enticed Eve to disobey God also:
And Eve fell for it!
Genesis 3:6 KJV
Now in the sense of fairness we must say that the serpent did not tell a bald faced lie. what he did was to change God's words around so that they implied something different.
So let's take a look at what God said in comparison to what the serpent said.
What God said:
Genesis 2:16 KJV
What the serpent said.
Genesis 3:1 B
It is only a slight change but it completely changes the intent of the question. and what the serpent says next is in no way a lie.
Genesis 3:5 KJV
notice that the serpent does not say you will be as God, but that you will be as gods. This simple distinction is between God and gods.
What God said:
Genesis 2:17 KJV
So even though the serpent only twisted God's word to change the overall meaning, the intent was still to incite insurrection against God. And for doing so what punishment did God give the Serpent?
Genesis 3:14 and 15 KJV
So what does verse 15 actually indicate?
We also need to note that the Serpent does not apply to all reptiles, so your lizards and frogs don't count.
Ezekiel 28:15–18 describes the angel that became Satan:
It seems logical that this beautiful proud spirit would have materialized as a resplendently beautiful creature. And it seems logical that eve would have been enthralled by the beauty of this creature. Had the serpent been a gross scary dangerous viper eve would not likely have hung around and conversed with it