Do Creationists Believe in Talking Snakes?

coffee4u · May 19, 2021

Dale said:
Coffee “The created world was changed and destroyed first at the fall and again at the flood. Its gone.”

I don’t believe this is true. There is no sign that all of creation was damaged at the time of the Expulsion from Eden. Genesis One tells us that the sun, moon and stars were placed by God to mark days, months, years and seasons. This hasn’t changed.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky
to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs
to mark seasons and days and years,
and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light
on the earth.” And it was so.
Genesis 1:14-15 NIV

Psalm 104 recapitulates the creation story with no sign of a Fall of Man.

He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. --Psalm 104: 5 NIV

While we know today that the earth moves around the sun, it is placed at the right distance from the sun for life to flourish. It is substantially true that God laid the foundation of the earth, and no event in human history has changed that. Psalm 104 presents a God who is actively involved in His creation.

He waters the mountains from his upper chambers; the earth
is satisfied by the fruit of his work. --Psalm 104:13 NIV

God is not inconceivably remote, as some think. God has not abandoned the earth and the earth is not cut off from God’s attentions.

There is nothing in the Gospels about the world being damaged. The problem is not some horrible event in the past but the tendency of mortals to ignore God and depart from His ways.

Genesis 2:16-17

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.”

"nothing in the Gospels about the world being damaged"

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,

“Because you have done this,
cursed are you among all animals
and among all wild creatures;
upon your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.”

16 To the woman he said,

“I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

17 And to the man he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife,
and have eaten of the tree
about which I commanded you,
‘You shall not eat of it,’
cursed is the ground because of you;
in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread
until you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.”

God just proclaimed all the changes that were taking place around them and yet you call that undamaged? That is just the changes shown there. The flood did even more damage.

The gospel is all about Jesus redeeming us from sin. Sin and death originated with Adam.
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned--

Dale · May 20, 2021

coffee4u said:
Genesis 2:16-17

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.”

"nothing in the Gospels about the world being damaged"

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,

“Because you have done this,
cursed are you among all animals
and among all wild creatures;
upon your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.”

16 To the woman he said,

“I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

17 And to the man he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife,
and have eaten of the tree
about which I commanded you,
‘You shall not eat of it,’
cursed is the ground because of you;
in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread
until you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.”

God just proclaimed all the changes that were taking place around them and yet you call that undamaged? That is just the changes shown there. The flood did even more damage.

The gospel is all about Jesus redeeming us from sin. Sin and death originated with Adam.
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned--

I said that there is nothing in the Gospels about the physical world being damaged.
Not one of your quotes comes from the Gospels.

Earlier you said that it is "God's Flood" not "Noah's Flood."
The phrase "God's Flood" doesn't appear in the Bible. Noah's Flood is entirely appropriate.

coffee4u · May 20, 2021

Dale said:
I said that there is nothing in the Gospels about the physical world being damaged.
Not one of your quotes comes from the Gospels.

Earlier you said that it is "God's Flood" not "Noah's Flood."
The phrase "God's Flood" doesn't appear in the Bible. Noah's Flood is entirely appropriate.

Why must it be from the Gospels?
Are you claiming that only the Gospels are scripture?

Religiot · May 21, 2021

Dale said:
It sounds like you don’t believe that Charles Darwin was an “actual scientist.”

[Staff Edit] I said nothing of the sort.

Darwin was a scientist, and like many others, he had poor hypotheses that led to poor theories. --Darwin never claimed to go beyond conjecture; that fact alone demonstrates the absurdity of the present claims today.

Religiot · May 21, 2021

coffee4u said:
Science is simply humans trying to make sense of what they see; who weren't there, who don't know everything.

Amen, sister.

I would only substitute the word science for the term 'science falsely so called' when referring to the foolish faith of secularists, because actual science (knowledge), proves God's creation, and the biblical account of all things, without exception.

Science solely means knowledge.

BoomsTheory · May 22, 2021

Dale said:
In Genesis 3, a serpent, or snake, talks with Eve. In Genesis 3:14-15, God says that the serpent will lose its legs. God doesn’t say that the serpent will no longer be able to talk or no longer have the intelligence to talk. We know there are no talking snakes today. Snakes do not have the vocal cords for speech, or any brain that could carry on a conversation.

All of this fits with the creation story in Genesis 2-3 being a parable for our instruction. It is not history. It doesn’t take place in the real world. The talking snake is a literary device.

For creationists, God did not take the serpent’s voice away, or say that it would lose intelligence to become a dumb animal. If there were talking snakes only six thousand years ago, when many creationists believe the world was created, there should be talking snakes today. How do creationists explain this?

Many creationists have been taught that Eve was tempted by Satan. They have been taught to substitute “Satan” for “snake” or serpent. Yet Genesis says nothing about Satan being in the Garden of Eden. This could be one reason creationists don’t ask when snakes lost their voices, they think of the snake as a manifestation of Satan. Yet Genesis says no such thing. God talks about the serpent as a real animal when it says it will “crawl on its belly,” or lose its legs.

If God didn’t take away the snake’s voice or its intelligence at the Expulsion from Eden, why don’t snakes talk today? It’s something for creationists to think about.

The King James Version does mention devils more often than most modern translation. Even so, the first mention of Satan in the KJV is in I Chronicles.

And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
I Chronicles 21:1 KJV

The first mention of devil or devils in the KJV is in Leviticus.

And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after
whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute for ever unto them
throughout their generations. Leviticus 17:7 KJV

There is no mention of Devil or Satan in Eden, or in any other part of Genesis.

Yes, Christians believe in a talking serpent. You gotta understand how Satan works and how there is different meanings in the garden story. But you aren't going to know how to identify Satan's deception and lies if you don't study the word. Him and the fallen angels come disguised as prophets and saints. That's why you always stay on alert. Satan is a deciever , liar, and a fraud. And he's slick. So stay aware

BoomsTheory · May 22, 2021

Mark Quayle said:
Your opening thesis sounds a lot like Atheists who mock the Bible by bringing up plural talking snakes and talking donkeys. I only remember one of each in the Bible. The donkey was given a voice for a purpose; my guess is that the serpent was not something we are familiar with nowadays. Quite possibly even a physical manifestation of the Devil himself.

What is interesting to me is the notion that if God indeed is real and created everything, how is any of this not literally possible for him to do --he who is the very 'inventor' of reality.

It's called a hybrid. Reptilian.

Dale · May 23, 2021

coffee4u said:
Why must it be from the Gospels?
Are you claiming that only the Gospels are scripture?

You, and many others, place an enormous emphasis on the Expulsion from Eden and the Fall of Man that goes with it, along with this notion that all of Creation fell with Adam and Eve. If these ideas are as important as you say, it is remarkable that they are not mentioned in the Gospels --- and they are not. If the ideas that creationists claim to extract from Genesis aren’t found in the Gospels, that is a strong sign that creationist understanding of Genesis is mistaken.

Dale · May 23, 2021

Religiot said:
Amazing...

I've gotta ask, do you fear God?

Religiot: “...do you fear God?”

I am not here to be interrogated. Take a look at this passage.

Jesus entered the temple courts, and, while he was teaching,
the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him.
“By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked.
“And who gave you this authority?”
Jesus replied, “I will also ask you one question. If you answer
me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things.
John’s baptism — where did it come from? Was it from
heaven, or from men?” They discussed it among themselves
and said, “If we say, `From heaven’, he will ask, `Then why
didn’t you believe him?’
But if we say, `From men’ — we are afraid of the people, for
they all hold that John was a prophet.”
So they answered Jesus, “We don’t know.” Then he said,
“Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these
things.”

Matthew 21:23-27 NIV

BoomsTheory · May 23, 2021

Dale said:
You, and many others, place an enormous emphasis on the Expulsion from Eden and the Fall of Man that goes with it, along with this notion that all of Creation fell with Adam and Eve. If these ideas are as important as you say, it is remarkable that they are not mentioned in the Gospels --- and they are not. If the ideas that creationists claim to extract from Genesis aren’t found in the Gospels, that is a strong sign that creationist understanding of Genesis is mistaken.

coffee4u · May 24, 2021

Dale said:
You, and many others, place an enormous emphasis on the Expulsion from Eden and the Fall of Man that goes with it, along with this notion that all of Creation fell with Adam and Eve. If these ideas are as important as you say, it is remarkable that they are not mentioned in the Gospels --- and they are not. If the ideas that creationists claim to extract from Genesis aren’t found in the Gospels, that is a strong sign that creationist understanding of Genesis is mistaken.

I will ask again, do you believe that only the four gospels are scripture?

All creation did fall into corruption.
Romans 8:19-22
For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.

Dale · May 24, 2021

coffee4u said:
I will ask again, do you believe that only the four gospels are scripture?

All creation did fall into corruption.
Romans 8:19-22
For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.

Take a look at this passage in Isaiah. The prophet, predicting a time of peace and prosperity, says that the deserts and wastelands will bloom “like Eden.” This wouldn’t be possible if all of creation was irretrievably broken and fallen.

The LORD will surely comfort Zion and will look with
compassion on all her ruins; he will make her deserts like
Eden, her wastelands like the garden of the LORD. Joy and
gladness will be found in her, thanksgiving and the sound of
singing. Isaiah 51:3 NIV

FaithT · Jun 19, 2021

Mark Quayle said:
Your opening thesis sounds a lot like Atheists who mock the Bible by bringing up plural talking snakes and talking donkeys. I only remember one of each in the Bible. The donkey was given a voice for a purpose; my guess is that the serpent was not something we are familiar with nowadays. Quite possibly even a physical manifestation of the Devil himself.

What is interesting to me is the notion that if God indeed is real and created everything, how is any of this not literally possible for him to do --he who is the very 'inventor' of reality.

I read that the snake was the devil.

Mark Quayle · Jun 19, 2021

Hope1960 said:
I read that the snake was the devil.

The Bible doesn't say it directly, though it certainly seems so. It does call the Devil "that old serpent" in another place, though.

miamited · Jul 3, 2021

@Dale

Hi Dale, I would contend that the only people who believe in a talking serpent would be those who believe in a talking donkey. Keep in mind that God's word doesn't tell us of any change that God made in donkeys before or after the one that spoke to Balaam. Yet I haven't ever heard a donkey speak today.

God bless,
Ted

GenemZ · Jul 5, 2021

Dale said:
In Genesis 3, a serpent, or snake, talks with Eve. In Genesis 3:14-15, God says that the serpent will lose its legs. God doesn’t say that the serpent will no longer be able to talk or no longer have the intelligence to talk. We know there are no talking snakes today. Snakes do not have the vocal cords for speech, or any brain that could carry on a conversation.

Demons can inhabit animals. The Bible shows that to be true. But, you don't have to believe it.

If a prophet back then said that men in the future would be able to see and speak to other people many miles away, done with a little device held in his hand.... I am sure some people back then would have mocked the prophet's vision like some now do about the fall and transformation of animals that took place after Adam fell.

There is a reason why Christians believe the serpent account. It was not because they simply believed what they were told what the Bible says.

They can believe, because after having been stabilized after the shock of finding out that Jesus is real?.. the rest just came easy once that "peaceful shock" took place.

When Jesus revealed himself to me to be real? I then knew I could believe the Bible (much to my amazement). For before my regeneration? For me, the thought of Jesus being really active in a person's life seemed like fantasy. Just like the Bible was to me.

I would venture to say that if Christians who became saved as an older person (not as a child) were questioned? And, asked if they believed the Bible before their transformation within them took place? I would make a bet that they will say they found themselves unable to believe the Garden account prior to regeneration.

For myself.. I could not believe the Garden account was real. It used to puzzle me as to why folks kept on telling the account. Was I to believe fairy tales? The talking snake was merely a myth.

Then one day it happened to this Jewish kid at 29 years old. Walls came tumbling down. I was left standing. I could finally believe the Bible account!

Fervent · Jul 12, 2021

One of the things about Hebrew animal categories is they don't always correspond with our categories, and often there is overlap such as between "Leviathan" and a whale or dragon so we can't necessarily positively identify what is meant of the serpent in the garden. The rest of the Bible indicates that it was something more than an ordinary animal, but the most we can say about that is that it is referring to an enemy. So do creationists believe that a snake grew vocal chords and spoke through physical means? No, not necessarily.

GenemZ · Jul 12, 2021

Fervent said:
One of the things about Hebrew animal categories is they don't always correspond with our categories, and often there is overlap such as between "Leviathan" and a whale or dragon so we can't necessarily positively identify what is meant of the serpent in the garden. The rest of the Bible indicates that it was something more than an ordinary animal, but the most we can say about that is that it is referring to an enemy. So do creationists believe that a snake grew vocal chords and spoke through physical means? No, not necessarily.

Grew vocal cords no more than Balaam's donkey did....

What creationists believe is because they can believe. For once we get over the shock that Jesus is real the rest is easy.... The hard part is being able to know Jesus is alive and working in those whom He loves.

Before I knew it was Jesus, I knew Jesus. Just did not know who it was who was working in me for almost ten years.. But, I knew it was someone much more important than myself.

After I got adjusted to that shock, believing in the Garden account amused me to no end.

(me, when it happened) "I am now able to believe this!!!!!"

(unbelievers can not understand)

No one can understand the Bible from God's perspective unless they are born again.

Fervent · Jul 12, 2021

genez said:
Grew vocal cords no more than Balaam's donkey did....

What creationists believe is because they can believe. For once we get over the shock that Jesus is real the rest is easy.... The hard part is being able to know Jesus is alive and working in those whom He loves.

Before I knew it was Jesus, I knew Jesus. Just did not know who it was who was working in me for almost ten years.. But, I knew it was someone much more important than myself.

After I got adjusted to that shock, believing in the Garden account amused me to no end.

(me, when it happened) "I am now able to believe this!!!!!"

(unbelievers can not understand)

No one can understand the Bible from God's perspective unless they are born again.

What's rather strange to me is when professed believers accept God made everything from nothing, but then balk at God being able to do some trivial miracle.

GenemZ · Jul 12, 2021

Fervent said:
What's rather strange to me is when professed believers accept God made everything from nothing, but then balk at God being able to do some trivial miracle.

Yes... that's a perplexing mystery. But no more a mystery as how could certain angels reject the Lord after seeing Him from the spiritual level they possess.

Do Creationists Believe in Talking Snakes?

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist

Ted

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads