All about what? No one really knows how God created everything. Are you claiming that you do know? If so, please explain how God created everything. The only thing we can agree on here is that He did create it all. That's about it.Jac wrote:That says it all.
Given this I'm not a real fan of theistic evolution. I believe it explains too much without the involvement of God. As you know, (Ihope anyways) I'm no friend of Darwinian evolution. From this idea I gather that God is replaced by natural selection. However, that being said, I don't believe with 100 percent certainty that God didn't use some form of evolution in his creation. We just don't know, so I can't say "no" to this idea completely. My lean however is with progressive creationism.
Ok, let's take a different approach then. Let's just examine the words that involve the word “serpent” or the Hebrew “nachash.” This way we won't even involve other scripture. Seems fair? Let's just examine the word from the Strong's concordance.Jac wrote:edit: I'm going to take one last shot at this. I am convinced that I'm not explaining myself correctly, because you are not even addressing my point. Let me just do this Q/A style:
Q. Briefly, what causes you to consider the snake in Genesis 3 to be non-literal?
Serpent, Strong's H5175 nachash (naw-khash);
Usage: A serpent, so called from it's hissing. The root 1) to practice divination, divine, observe signs, learn by experience, diligently observe, practice fortunetelling, take as an omen.
Source: http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexi ... 5175&t=KJV
As we can see the hebrew word for serpent in the Bible is "Nachash". It can actually mean a snake from it's hiss not really what is was. In fact the root word has more of a focus on the actions and character of the snake but not literally a snake. The root is actually more of a adjective than a noun. It literally means one who practices divination, an or is an enchanter and that is exactly what the devil was doing with Eve. He was speaking or whispering lies to her. Other words can also mean to illuminate or shine as we shall see…
I've been reading from the Hebrew scholar Michael S. Heiser on this topic lately so I thought I would quote from him.
Source: http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/nachashnotes.pdfIn this lesson, I'd like to lay out in more detail, with at least a little visual help, my translation of the word in Gen. 3 usually translated “serpent” in Genesis 3 — hannachash. I'll also trace a few references to the “seed” of hannachash in the Old Testament. Some of what follows will be familiar, as my goal is to try and tie a few ends together a bit more tightly for readers.
The Hebrew word שחנ , is actually an adjective (ןונ ש; meaning “bright”, “brazen (as in shiny brass) with the prefixed article (-ה the word “the” in Hebrew). Thus the word is formed ןונ ש + חקיפ (a dot is added in the second letter from the right when an article is attached). The whole word then, in the Hebrew text is שחנ , hannachash
(nachash is pronounced “nakash”).
What is different about this approach is that I view the base word, nachash, as an adjective, not a noun. The NOUN spelled nachash in Hebrew can mean: snake / serpent or one who practices of divination. The adjective means “bright, brazen” and is itself the base word for other nouns in Hebrew, like “shining brass.”
Hebrew grammar, it is not unusual for an adjective to be “converted” for use as a noun (the proper word is “substantivized”).2 A common example would be “holy one” (with or without the article). If we take שחנ as deriving from the adjective rather than as a noun, the translation becomes “the shining one”, which is quite in concert with descriptions of the satan figure in the Old Testament. For example, in Isa 14:12-15, he is called Helel ben-shachar — “The shining one, son of the dawn.” Elsewhere, divine beings are described as “shining” or luminous, even by use of the adjective ןונ ש. For example:
Now on the twenty-fourth day of the first month, as I was by
the side of the great river, that is, the Tigris, 5I lifted my eyes
and looked, and behold, a certain man clothed in linen, whose
waist was girded with gold of Uphaz! His body was like beryl,
his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like
torches of fire, his arms and feet like burnished bronze
(ןונ ש; ; חקיפ) in color, and the sound of his words like the
voice of a multitude.
Personally, I tend to think that, in light of the serpentine appearance of divine beings in Yahweh's presence, what we
have in Genesis 3 is wordplay using all the meanings of the חקיפ semantic range. That is, Eve was not talking to a snake. She was speaking to an bright, shining upright being who was serpentine in appearance, and who was trying to bewitch her with lies. She was in the presence of one of the sons of God, beings who had free will, who were more powerful than mere angels, whom humanity was created “a little lower” (Psalm 8:4-5; the phrase usually translated as “a little lower than the angels” is actually “a little lower than the elohim in the Hebrew text).3 She was speaking to a member of the divine council who did not share Yahweh's enthusiasm for his new creation, humankind, to whom Yahweh had just given rule over the planet (Gen 1:26-27). These mere humans were—as the “lesser elohim” had been previously—created as Yahweh's image (“let US”…“OUR” in Gen 1:26-27), to rule the cosmos for Yahweh, and earth — at least until humanity was fashioned. In this last regard, I share the view of certain lines of Jewish tradition that teach the “serpent's” motive for seducing Eve was jealousy at humanity's “appointment” as supreme authority under Yahweh on earth — as opposed to the sons of God getting that job.