Yet Genesis describes the serpent as if it were a completely ordinary reptile, apart from being very clever and able to talk. It is one of the beasts of the field, who ends up slithering on its belly like snakes we see today, and eating dirt as snakes appear to do. The curse pronounced on the snake are curses designed for an animal just as Adam's curses are curses suited to a farmer and Eve's to a wife and mother. The snake has children as Eve does and its children are enemies of Eve's biological children. Like normal snakes it can kill by biting people on the foot and can be killed by having its head stamped on. The snake is as real a snake in the story as the pigs were in the prodigal son, or the birds of the air in the parable of the sower.
Actually, the great curiousity about this whole thing is how UNLIKE the story fo the snake is to your parables. That seems to be your first point about the "ordinary reptile" (in part, that seemed your point).
There are no cues to distinguish parable from narrative. In all of your other examples, the text is rife with clues.
Daniel is also pretty clearly a prophetic vision. That is different. Time is compressed, or its order not always regular.
You know my position on Psalms and we all agree that neither TE nor YEC thinks the the Psalmist meant that God sits on a circle, since the text tells us we are in metaphor land in a much clearer way.
The talking snake is spoken of in a very ordinary way. Which admittedly makes it a bit of a head scratcher. But, that is not ground to lump it in with all the other distinct literary forums. Now, it is certainly convenient to do so, but that is hardly justification. Most so-called modern scholarship is scholarship of convenience on this point.
In a mixed metaphor form, one has to determine where the boundaries lie. Jesus said "This is my body." If it wasn't really Jesus in miniature he was eating, is Jesus therefore not at a table, not speaking, not with the Apostles or was he really referring to a future really heavy trip of free love and acid in Haight Asbury in 1968, involving a guy with a long beard? The presence of some metaphor does free you from the need to draw a boundary based upon what the text says.
I still struggle with the talking snake. But, if you use Juvenissum very apt commentary above, we have the following literal events: talking, talking to a woman, the woman is Eve, temptation is in view, the one talking is evil. Now, what is a snake? And what is the curse?
Does the ground grow thorns. There's a literal curse. Do snakes have legs? Vestigial at best. Not easy stuff.
Juvenissum made what seems to me to be an excellent catch. Paul says the serpent is transformed. Does that mean that all you have to complain about is that Genesis does not announce a transformation when the word for an ordinary reptile is used?
What exactly is a "transformation"? Does it have scales and a forked tongue? How do you rule out that possibility?
Here's a different question. Why does this beast no go on its belly?
There is a relationship between forbidden "fruit" and the curse of agriculture among the thorns and stones of the earth.
The nature of angels in Gen. 6 (and Jude) seeking embodiment for improper purposes still bothers me in this respect. Note that good angels are often referred to as "men" in appearance. Satan, not so, as far as I can remember. Something messed up seemed to have happened with Satan in terms of his flesh, and yet he can carry Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple and high mountains. Somehow he can present himself before Gods' Court to prosecute Job. Weird stuff deserving of caution.
