Starting with this section, we are now entering a series of discussions examining the various Biblical evidences identifying Lilith as the infamous Serpent of the garden.\u00a0 The first evidences we shall discuss are those that dispel the myth that the serpent must be a reptilian snake demonically inhabited by Lucifer.\u00a0 This is a rather big hurdle to overcome for some people, as in certain circles this popular notion may be quite entrenched.\u00a0 The popularity of the notion no doubt began with the KJV\u2019s choice to render the Hebrew word nachash as \u201cserpent\u201d, thereby invoking the image of a snake to the reader.\u00a0 Dispelling this popular identification is made more difficult because a snake also seemingly explains God\u2019s curse upon the serpent to crawl upon its belly and eat dust (as the flicking tongue of snakes appear to taste the ground).\u00a0 However, as we shall see, the passages quite clearly state that the serpent was a mammal.\u00a0 Moreover, it was the most intelligent and cunning of all mammals.\u00a0 This indicates that the Serpent must have been a human, albeit one with some defect of spirit or soul that caused God to classify it as an animal and not a man.\u00a0 Lilith best explains this most cunning non-man.<\/p>\n
The first indication that the Serpent was not a snake comes from a simple logical exercise.\u00a0 If it was God\u2019s curse that transformed the Serpent into a snake that must go upon its belly and eat dust, then the Serpent could not have been a snake before the curse.\u00a0 Otherwise, God\u2019s curse for it to go upon its belly would have been pointless, as it would have no detrimental impact upon the creature.\u00a0 The Scofield Study Bible takes this same position.\u00a0 Scofield writes, “The serpent, in his Edenic form, is not to be thought of as a writhing reptile. \u00a0That is the effect of the curse (Gen. 3:14). \u00a0The creature which lent itself to Satan may well have been the most beautiful as it was the most \u2018subtle\u2019 of creatures less than man.\u201d\u00a0 Therefore, even under the most entrenched position that the post-curse Serpent refers to a snake, the pre-curse Serpent must have been something else that walked on legs.\u00a0 The position that the post-curse Serpent was a snake provides absolutely no clue to suggest what it might have been before its cursing.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Note that I do not hold that the Serpent was transformed into a snake at its cursing. \u00a0Rather, God\u2019s cursing of its belly and its eating of dust refer to the curses of the bitter water trial to which God is subjecting the Serpent Lilith.\u00a0 In the bitter water trial, a priest forced a wayward adulterous woman to eat dust suspended in water.\u00a0 If she was guilty, her belly would swell and her thighs (i.e. legs) would rot and fall.\u00a0 This critical ceremony shall be discussed in detail in section 3.16, and more details on the mystical cursing will be investigated in section 3.20.<\/p>\n
Does the Biblical text provide any clue as to who or what the Serpent was?\u00a0 Yes it does.\u00a0 Ge 3:1 states that that the Serpent was the most cunning \u201cbeast of the field\u201d, or chayot ha\u2019sadeh<\/em>.\u00a0 The chayot ha\u2019sadeh<\/em> are the final creatures created by Jehovah on creation day 6.\u00a0 Except for Adam, they are the highest life forms on the planet.\u00a0 This is so because Genesis describes God as continuously creating more and more complex life throughout each creation day.\u00a0 The beasts of the field are the culmination of this creation event.\u00a0 These would essentially be mammals \u2013 mice, cats, dogs, wolves, bears, etc.\u00a0 They have large complex brains and are soulish creatures who have the ability to display emotion.\u00a0 This emotional capability is confirmed in Job 40:20, which says the chayot ha\u2019sadeh<\/em> \u201cplay\u201d with each other when food is plentiful and there is no want.\u00a0 The characterization of chayot ha\u2019sade<\/em> as higher mammals is confirmed throughout the Bible.\u00a0 The term appears 24 times in the Bible, and in each appearance is obviously applies to mammals who eat crops and\/or hunt humans (lions, etc).\u00a0 The emotional and intellectual capacity of the chayot ha\u2019sade<\/em> is why only they and birds were brought before Adam as potential companions in Ge 3.\u00a0 Only with these soulish creatures could Adam hope to have any type of emotional co-relationship.\u00a0<\/p>\n A literal translation of Ge 3:1 is provided below, as well as the KJV version.\u00a0 A breakdown of the word-by-word Hebrew is provided in Table 3\u201111.\u00a0 It is quite clear from the passage that the Serpent is a member \u201cfrom\u201d all the beasts of the field.[1]<\/a>\u00a0 Thus, the serpent could not be a snake.\u00a0 It must be a mammal.\u00a0<\/p>\n Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. …<\/p>\n And the serpent became crafty from all beasts of the field which the Jehovah God had made. …<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n