(April 11, 2014 at 11:46 am)Revelation777 Wrote: Concerning Satan - Gen 3:1 combined with Rev 20:2
OK, let's go to the tape:
Quote:Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Sometimes a snake is just a snake. The serpent was just a "beast of the field". In other words, an animal. There's nothing supernatural about this animal (most of them could talk in Genesis, as Noah later demonstrated). The fact that Eve was not the least bit surprised that it could talk underscores that this was how things worked prior to the Flood.
No mention of Satan. No mention of possession. No mention of any manipulation by any supernatural being.
It's a "just so" story to explain why snakes have no legs.
Quote:Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
The oblique reference to "that old serpent" is a Christian ret-con to tie in Christian theology to the OT. However, let that go for now. The verse says the serpent IS the Devil, not possessed by the devil.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
